Irish Property Market chat II - *read mod note post #1 before posting*

timmyntc

Amadan Dubh wrote: »

Not pocket change as it is the equivalent of not having to hand over approximately €8,000 of your gross salary in a year!

Ah here you cant go looking at things like that in terms of gross.
That would be like me saying drink is mad expensive since its ~€9 per pint if you take it out of your gross salary!

It is a substantial amount certainly though - and I'd love to know if there is any reason why REITS would give discounts this way other than to avoid impacting the valuation of their property.

Ace2007

timmyntc wrote: »

The offers to save 4,200 a year if you start a lease are likely a way of making up for reduced demand.
INstead of dropping rent prices, you give an upfront discount, but the headline rent remains the same. I think it gets around RPZ rules, but also crucially it keeps the property valuations from dropping along with rental demand.

It's a very smart way of doing it, if they drop the rents, then they are capped at 4% increases.

timmyntc

Ace2007 wrote: »

It's a very smart way of doing it, if they drop the rents, then they are capped at 4% increases.

Exactly - and the property's value is based on the projected rental yield.
So if the headline yield is kept up (even if achieved rents are lower) it still stops their asset from depreciating.

Seems a bit like a bubble to me.

Marius34

timmyntc wrote: »

Exactly - and the property's value is based on the projected rental yield.
So if the headline yield is kept up (even if achieved rents are lower) it still stops their asset from depreciating.

Seems a bit like a bubble to me.

property's value profits is based on the projected rental yield.

If they reduce their actual rents let say 20%, their profits likely to go down in coming years, due to RPZ.

AlmightyCushion

timmyntc wrote: »

The offers to save 4,200 a year if you start a lease are likely a way of making up for reduced demand.
INstead of dropping rent prices, you give an upfront discount, but the headline rent remains the same. I think it gets around RPZ rules, but also crucially it keeps the property valuations from dropping along with rental demand.

The fact that the savings are advertised as yearly does indicate it is trying to get around the RPZ rules for rent increases. The apartment is €2,100 a month. When you factor in the discount it is €1,750 a month over 12 months. If they charged a straight €1,750 a month and did a 4% annual increase, in 5 years the rent would be €2,135 a month.

Jmc25

timmyntc wrote: »

Seems a bit like a bubble to me.

Not sure if it could be called a bubble, but I think there are too many high end apartments in Dublin for the amount of high paid workers who want to rent them.

I think there'll come a point where the newly built/fund managed places have to drop their rents and that will help take some of the pressure off the entire Dublin market.

But hey that's just my guess.

timmyntc

Marius34 wrote: »

property's value profits is based on the projected rental yield.

If they reduce their actual rents let say 20%, their profits likely to go down in coming years, due to RPZ.

Yes but the value is based on the potential profits.
THe value REITs pay for apartment blocks is based on an expected rental yield - if the yield dips, then its no longer worth it to buy at that price.

growleaves

This is good article from a German web magazine. It discusses the Irish situation, and it has an infographic of 'Europe's Biggest Landlords':

House prices: 'Wall of money' hits European real estate

Something else has been booming in Europe's property market though: the volume of institutional investment, particularly in the form of international capital flows from major corporations, hedge funds and other financial market actors.

Wall of money

According to data from Real Capital Analytics, institutional investment into Europe's residential market hit a new record in 2020, accounting for nearly 30% of total acquisition activity. That represents a huge jump from a rate of 10% in 2015.

The characteristics of the pandemic have helped fuel a trend that had already been developing, according to Oliver Knight, a residential property expert with Knight Frank, a real estate consultancy.

"Rising investment comes as we start to see a structural shift into residential investment markets away from some of the more traditional real estate sectors, such as offices and retail," he told DW.

I've highlighted a pertinent point since many people are now saying institutional investors have been in the Irish market a long time.

Yes they have, but they are really scooping up as much as they can right now. I think they're looking to hold physical assets as a hedge against a dollar collapse. Blackrock/Vanguard are buying up residential homes all over the US.

mcsean2163

timmyntc wrote: »

Ah here you cant go looking at things like that in terms of gross.
That would be like me saying drink is mad expensive since its ~€9 per pint if you take it out of your gross salary!

It is a substantial amount certainly though - and I'd love to know if there is any reason why REITS would give discounts this way other than to avoid impacting the valuation of their property.

I paid €7 for an ale and €6 a Guinness in stoneybatter last week. €26 for 4 takeaway pints. I wonder where you are getting pints for €4.50?

Marius34

timmyntc wrote: »

Yes but the value is based on the potential profits.
THe value REITs pay for apartment blocks is based on an expected rental yield - if the yield dips, then its no longer worth it to buy at that price.

No the property value is not based on profits. It's based on Market sale price, not rental price.

L1011

mcsean2163 wrote: »

I paid €7 for an ale and €6 a Guinness in stoneybatter last week. €26 for 4 takeaway pints. I wonder where you are getting pints for €4.50?

4.50 was a fairly common price for a pint of Guinness, in the bar, in a non-fancy pub in Dublin.

Takeout pints have overheads, reduced margin due to reduced volume and so on so not comparable.

Stoneybatter is no longer cheap either, bit like for housing.

timmyntc

Marius34 wrote: »

No the property value is not based on profits. It's based on Market sale price, not rental price.

Yes but the price it will fetch on the market is directly related to the rent it can achieve.

Higher rent = higher prices, lower rents = lower prices.

REITs see apartment as a mechanism for yield - an investment.
When buying they consider market rent to be fixed (at that time), and then set the sale price based on the minimum yield they need.

So for market rent of (example) 12000pa for an apartment, and they want a 3% yield, the max price they would pay is 12000 / 0.03 = 400k per apartment.

If that rent were to fall 20%: 9600/0.03 = 320k max sale price for 3% yield.

Obviously there is a floor on prices based on how much it costs to construct apartments, but the price ceiling is based on market rent and desired rental yield.
As you pointed out, the RPZ rules make dropping rent so much more painful, as even if market rents rebound you are stuck behind for years.

mcsean2163 wrote:

I paid €7 for an ale and €6 a Guinness in stoneybatter last week. €26 for 4 takeaway pints. I wonder where you are getting pints for €4.50?

I was assuming €5 pint and less than 50% marginal rate of tax

growleaves

L1011 wrote: »

Stoneybatter is no longer cheap either, bit like for housing.

Stoneybatter is a part of the hipster-industrial complex, thoroughly gentrified.

When Christy Brown used to live there the family were plasterers.

Amadan Dubh

timmyntc wrote: »

Ah here you cant go looking at things like that in terms of gross.
That would be like me saying drink is mad expensive since its ~€9 per pint if you take it out of your gross salary!

It is a substantial amount certainly though - and I'd love to know if there is any reason why REITS would give discounts this way other than to avoid impacting the valuation of their property.

Generally taxes, salary increases and bonuses are done on a gross salary basis and people generally don't think in net terms with respect to their annual salaries. As such, it is important to contextualise 4k as needing to earn or else saving 8k more gross salary, as there is a risk of thinking "oh, 4k isn't a lot, I earn 80k".

timmyntc

Amadan Dubh wrote: »

Generally taxes, salary increases and bonuses are done on a gross salary basis and people generally don't think in net terms with respect to their annual salaries. As such, it is important to contextualise 4k as needing to earn or else saving 8k more gross salary, as there is a risk of thinking "oh, 4k isn't a lot, I earn 80k".

I suppose, but most people think of rent in terms of the cash they have, albeit thats on a monthly basis. I suppose if you look yearly then you can compare with gross, not too many people know their net yearly income off-hand.

Villa05

Bass Reeves wrote:

Problem is the truth hurts unfortunately it is still the truth. Often you have to be blunt and condescending for people to understand your point.

I think it's the smugness of the 2 individuals involved. The bloated DCC official with thoughts of how easy his job is going to be when all he has to do is sign taxpayer funded cheques every month for 10k properties
""shur this cheaper than emergency accomodation"

The man thinks he's a genius saving the country the country a fortune.

God forbid the council of a capital city would have to build an maintain property that kind of work is beneath them it appears

As for the other guy, it's scary that he was chief advisor on housing policy. Its obvious to see why we are where we are

On a side note Varadkar bragging about the fact that that people in houses valued at over 1 million would actually pay less under the new property tax regime is an eye opener
It looks to me that people in average houses priced between 200 and 400k would see the rises as that's where the maximum house price inflation because of government policy of demand led interventions in the market

Proof if it was ever needed of where there priorities lie.

Amadan Dubh wrote:

Not pocket change as it is the equivalent of not having to hand over approximately €8,000 of your gross salary in a year!

Taxed to the hilt and its then used to push up your rent

We're the Brits kinder to us when they occupied the entire country.

Marius34

timmyntc wrote: »

Yes but the price it will fetch on the market is directly related to the rent it can achieve.

Higher rent = higher prices, lower rents = lower prices.

REITs see apartment as a mechanism for yield - an investment.
When buying they consider market rent to be fixed (at that time), and then set the sale price based on the minimum yield they need.

So for market rent of (example) 12000pa for an apartment, and they want a 3% yield, the max price they would pay is 12000 / 0.03 = 400k per apartment.

If that rent were to fall 20%: 9600/0.03 = 320k max sale price for 3% yield.

Obviously there is a floor on prices based on how much it costs to construct apartments, but the price ceiling is based on market rent and desired rental yield.
As you pointed out, the RPZ rules make dropping rent so much more painful, as even if market rents rebound you are stuck behind for years.

Yes, REITs chasing rental yield, and its profits. And see if it's worth investment. The lower property value, and higher rents, the higher rental yield, but rental profits does not change the property value.

timmyntc

Marius34 wrote: »

Yes, REITs chasing rental yield, and its profits. And see if it's worth investment. The lower property value, and higher rents, the higher rental yield, but rental profits does not change the property value.

Why would investors chasing a minimum rental yield of 3% buy a property at 400k if the market rent wont give a 3% return on investment? They wont.

The market rents dictate the market prices (as a function of demand) - what else would?

Marius34

timmyntc wrote: »

Why would investors chasing a minimum rental yield of 3% buy a property at 400k if the market rent wont give a 3% return on investment? They wont.

The market rents dictate the market prices (as a function of demand) - what else would?

They would not invest in that market if they not happy with rental yields. It doesn't mean that now they can buy/build that apartment block much cheaper, to keep their rental yields.

Ace2007

timmyntc wrote: »

Why would investors chasing a minimum rental yield of 3% buy a property at 400k if the market rent wont give a 3% return on investment? They wont.

The market rents dictate the market prices (as a function of demand) - what else would?

Sure there is capital appreciation as well that's not linked to rental. As you've shown plenty of times rent is capped at 4% per annum, but property inflation is much higher.

Rental yield is around 5/8% so if the property goes for lower - the yeild is higher and vice versa, but to say that the price is determine by the yield is not right - every investor has different wants and needed so what yield would you use?

timmyntc

Marius34 wrote: »

They would not invest in that market if they not happy with rental yields. It doesn't mean that now they can buy/build that apartment block much cheaper, to keep their rental yields.

If nobody would buy the apartment block because of poor yield, then the price must be dropped if the owner ever wants to sell it. Supply and demand.

As I said previously, there is a floor on prices based on construction costs. The ceiling on costs is based on rental yields. As rents fall, the max price an REIT would pay for apartments also falls.

And finally, whoever owns an apartment block, should the rents fall - not only will they see their rental income fall, but the valuation of the asset they own (the principal) will also drop. So its a big hit to their investment. Hence why they will try to circumvent RPZ rules and keep "market" rents as high as they can.

Amadan Dubh

Villa05 wrote: »

We're the Brits kinder to us when they occupied the entire country.

It's a very good question; I had a great grandad involved in advocating for tenant rights 100 years ago and to be honest I feel the cause is quite similar 100 years later.

Marius34

timmyntc wrote: »

If nobody would buy the apartment block because of poor yield, then the price must be dropped if the owner ever wants to sell it. Supply and demand.

As I said previously, there is a floor on prices based on construction costs. The ceiling on costs is based on rental yields. As rents fall, the max price an REIT would pay for apartments also falls.

And finally, whoever owns an apartment block, should the rents fall - not only will they see their rental income fall, but the valuation of the asset they own (the principal) will also drop. So its a big hit to their investment. Hence why they will try to circumvent RPZ rules and keep "market" rents as high as they can.

Just because they would drop now rental price for current empty properties, it doesn't mean that their estimated new investment rental price should drop as well. When they invest they look at potential rental yield. They are well aware that lockdown is not gone yet.
Just because rents went down in Dublin city during Covid, it doesn't mean that property value went down as well.

timmyntc

Marius34 wrote: »

Just because they would drop now rental price for current empty properties, it doesn't mean that their estimated new investment rental price should drop as well. When they invest they look at potential rental yield. They are well aware that lockdown is not gone yet.
Just because rents went down in Dublin city during Covid, it doesn't mean that property value went down as well.

Rents didnt go down over lockdown.
If they are expecting rental prices to go up post covid, why are they advertising big rent discounts designed in such a way as to bypass RPZ rules? Surely if they had confidence in rents going forward they could charge full rent with no discount?

Marius34

timmyntc wrote: »

Rents didnt go down over lockdown.
If they are expecting rental prices to go up post covid, why are they advertising big rent discounts designed in such a way as to bypass RPZ rules? Surely if they had confidence in rents going forward they could charge full rent with no discount?

There were lots of discussion on other thread last year, that rents are going down around Dublin City.

Regarding RPZ, That's exactly why they advertising with discounts to bypass RPZ.
If they just reduce the rents instead of providing discounts, they would not be able to increase price more than 4% a year, that's what RPZ is for.
Let say they have 2 bed apartment in city center with rent estimated post-lockdown on 3000E/month, now they can get only 2400E/month.
What do you think they should do, if they expect demands to return from September? and prices to go up?

timmyntc

Marius34 wrote: »

There were lots of discussion on other thread last year, that rents are going down around Dublin City.

Regarding RPZ, That's exactly why they advertising with discounts to bypass RPZ.
If they just reduce the rents instead of providing discounts, they would not be able to increase price more than 4% a year, that's what RPZ is for.
Let say they have 2 bed apartment in city center with rent estimated post-lockdown on 3000E/month, now they can get only 2400E/month.
What do you think they should do, if they expect demands to return from September? and prices to go up?

September is only 3 months away - a 4200 discount on rent is a lot if they expect rents to rebound from Sept.

agoodpunt

On a North city street DCC are developing an old dericlict aquired building into a family hub the house nextdoor was privately developed and has a mix of hap tenants i know the LL and what it cost him he collects the hap pays a portion back to revenue and maintains manages.
The house next door might get a pic or 2 next but after 1 1/2 years its shaping up but they will end up with an asset costing 5 times more the extravance is mind blowing 1 contracter boasted how the job didnt go to plan but not my problem as there is no budget.
I looked at the show last night pointing to waste look at the hosp, garda hq only private can do in budget
The example I mention is in the same area as those but the local councilars wont allow it to be broadcast

Marius34

timmyntc wrote: »

September is only 3 months away - a 4200 discount on rent is a lot if they expect rents to rebound from Sept.

The rebound shouldn't be all at once, that they would fill up all empty apartments in single month.

combat14

why you will never be able to buy a house in ireland - whats facing most young irish first time buyers today

https://youtu.be/8-xEOvfNTRc

combat14

combat14 wrote: »

why you will never be able to buy a house in ireland - whats facing most young irish first time buyers today

https://youtu.be/8-xEOvfNTRc

Not agree with that
I saving money for my house in Ireland last 10 years and only couple years left before I will buy house for cash
Believe me or not
The house is not the problem the problem is that too many people want get it for half price.
My mate bought brand new BMW for 70K for cash what could be 20 per cent of his mortgage.Now his BMW parked beside his renting property and he crying he cant afford buy the house.
Say NO to everything for 10 years.What the problem ? Or government has to worry about you just because you want drive BMW and show your friends Iphone for 1200 euros ?

CrazyFish

Revolution 1917 wrote: »

Not agree with that
I saving money for my house in Ireland last 10 years and only couple years left before I will buy house for cash
Believe me or not
The house is not the problem the problem is that too many people want get it for half price.
My mate bought brand new BMW for 70K for cash what could be 20 per cent of his mortgage.Now his BMW parked beside his renting property and he crying he cant afford buy the house.
Say NO to everything for 10 years.What the problem ? Or government has to worry about you just because you want drive BMW and show your friends Iphone for 1200 euros ?

I don't think everyone is going out buying bmw's in fairness. Your one friend sample size does not represent everyone. Everyone's situation is different.

combat14

Revolution 1917 wrote: »

Not agree with that
I saving money for my house in Ireland last 10 years and only couple years left before I will buy house for cash
Believe me or not
The house is not the problem the problem is that too many people want get it for half price.
My mate bought brand new BMW for 70K for cash what could be 20 per cent of his mortgage.Now his BMW parked beside his renting property and he crying he cant afford buy the house.
Say NO to everything for 10 years.What the problem ? Or government has to worry about you just because you want drive BMW and show your friends Iphone for 1200 euros ?

you can save all you like for 10 even 20 years and there is still no gaurantee in this country you will get a house at this rate

combat14

combat14 wrote: »

you can save all you like for 10 even 20 years and there is still no gaurantee in this country you will get a house at this rate

Depends what you want drive.

CrazyFish

CrazyFish wrote: »

I don't think everyone is going out buying bmw's in fairness. Your one friend sample size does not represent everyone. Everyone's situation is different.

When things goes to money everybody situation are the same.

Amadan Dubh

Amadan Dubh wrote: »

It's a very good question; I had a great grandad involved in advocating for tenant rights 100 years ago and to be honest I feel the cause is quite similar 100 years later.

For gods sake

Thomasirl123

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Not agree with that
I saving money for my house in Ireland last 10 years and only couple years left before I will buy house for cash
Believe me or not
The house is not the problem the problem is that too many people want get it for half price.
My mate bought brand new BMW for 70K for cash what could be 20 per cent of his mortgage.Now his BMW parked beside his renting property and he crying he cant afford buy the house.
Say NO to everything for 10 years.What the problem ? Or government has to worry about you just because you want drive BMW and show your friends Iphone for 1200 euros ?

What the problem?
You've stopped living for 10 years, you might be dead in 10 years so your dependents now have less income to afford rent, in 10 years you might be at peak boom prices, a certain level of debt is financially better than none if used correctly, etc

Bass Reeves

combat14 wrote: »

you can save all you like for 10 even 20 years and there is still no gaurantee in this country you will get a house at this rate

No but he has a plan and a target. He may not succeed but he is trying. There is s large portion of people expecting somebody else to sort there house for them while they live it up. Houses were never easy to buy you had to make scarficed now people expect to be able to buy a house or an apartment in there late twenties or early thirties maybe by themselves without putting any effort into it

John1648

Dear forum participants,

I took into account the comments you have made about Citywest.

Now I am close to sale agreed on 2 bedroom apartment in Balbriggan, very good condition, tenants in situ, rent 1400, price 200 000 EUR (quoted initially at 180 000), Cardy rock view area, close to the sea.

The tenants want to stay for 2 more year.

How does this sound to you as an investment?

I must say there is real frenzy on the market, people getting rid of cash in the anticipation of upcoming hyperinflation, it is a true liquidity tsunami...

Thank you!

Bass Reeves

John1648 wrote: »

Dear forum participants,

I took into account the comments you have made about Citywest.

Now I am close to sale agreed on 2 bedroom apartment, very good condition, tenants in situ, rent 1400, price 200 000 EUR (quoted initially at 180 000), Cardy rock view area, close to the sea.

The tenants want to stay for 2 more year.

How does this sound to you as an investment?

I must say there is real frenzy on the market, people getting rid of cash in the anticipation of upcoming hyperinflation, it is a true liquidity tsunami...

Thank you!

That good investment. ROI is slightly above 8%. If you borrowed 150k the repayments would be sub 850/month. Even assuming drop in rent your should not have to subsidize rental income to cover mortgage. Two year of a tenant in situ is a good option.

People on here complaining about no property available in Dublin. With WFH that apartment was readily available to a single person or young couple buying. It cannot be far from the LUAS.

Thomasirl123

Thomasirl123 wrote: »

What the problem?
You've stopped living for 10 years, you might be dead in 10 years so your dependents now have less income to afford rent, in 10 years you might be at peak boom prices, a certain level of debt is financially better than none if used correctly, etc

He/she hasn’t stopped living for 10 yrs, what nonsense. Is having a new car proof of life?

There is a chance prices will have dropped in 10 yrs, who in 2006 would have envisaged that 15 yrs later house prices would be less in many parts of the country.

Villa05

Revolution 1917 wrote:

Not agree with that I saving money for my house in Ireland last 10 years and only couple years left before I will buy house for cash Believe me or not The house is not the problem the problem is that too many people want get it for half price. My mate bought brand new BMW for 70K for cash what could be 20 per cent of his mortgage.Now his BMW parked beside his renting property and he crying he cant afford buy the house. Say NO to everything for 10 years.What the problem ? Or government has to worry about you just because you want drive BMW and show your friends Iphone for 1200 euros ?

Borrow for an appreciating asset when you can afford it.

The last boom wasn't so bad because your savings could generate the same return from savings on deposit so waiting for the crash was a viable option.

Your BMW buying friend reminds me of the government. in a housing context There buying/leasing Tesla's for social and affordable housing at great cost and completely unsustainable

The difference being there using other people's money, many who struggle to meet their own basic housing cost. They also had considerable stock of like new BMW that they sold to investment funds for peanuts and are now leasing them back

They also have all the key ingredients to build there own at a fraction of the price but instead choose to pull heavily from existing limited stock thereby driving up price and increasing the number of people that need assistance in covering their housing costs.

I wonder who will help out the government of Ireland and on what terms when they go crying to the markets that they can't afford health, education and bloated pensions because they bet the country on property yet again

Thomasirl123

Dav010 wrote: »

He/she hasn’t stopped living for 10 yrs, what nonsense. Is having a new car proof of life?

There is a chance prices will have dropped in 10 yrs, who in 2006 would have envisaged that 15 yrs later house prices would be less in many parts of the country.

Saying no everything for 10 years is living lol

You're talking nonsense. House price might double in 10 years. No one knows but if they can afford rent and savings for 10 years then a10 year mortgage today is very likely better value.

Bubbaclaus

Looking at the latest Property Price Index on the CSO website, it looks like nationally house prices have risen by just 2.3% since October 2018 to March 2021 (an annualised rate of under 1%). In Dublin the March 2021 price is almost identical to October 2018.

I've never seen house prices so static in Ireland.

Ace2007

Thomasirl123 wrote: »

Saying no everything for 10 years is living lol

You're talking nonsense. House price might double in 10 years. No one knows but if they can afford rent and savings for 10 years then a10 year mortgage today is very likely better value.

And if variable interest rates sky rocket how many of those 90% mortgage rate holders are going to be suffering and potentially defaulting.

It’s amazing how many posters put down someone who’s sacrifice things for what they want- too many people want to walk into a palace like house from day one and not have any renovations or anything to do. You can rent and buy cheaply in dublin of you want to - but too many people are afraid of what their peers might say and instead getting in over their head and then can’t afford to save

Ace2007

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Looking at the latest Property Price Index on the CSO website, it looks like nationally house prices have risen by just 2.3% since October 2018 to March 2021 (an annualised rate of under 1%). In Dublin the March 2021 price is almost identical to October 2018.

I've never seen house prices so static in Ireland.

To be fair hardly anyone was buying or selling in 2020, so at at guess I would say this is near zero or negative which drags the period your looking at down

yagan

John1648 wrote: »

I must say there is real frenzy on the market, people getting rid of cash in the anticipation of upcoming hyperinflation, it is a true liquidity tsunami...

What's your strategy for asset and yield depreciation?

Amadan Dubh

David McWillians writing today in the IT again on the property market. This is really dominating his broadcasts the last few months. Perhaps a solution that is a silver bullet to the problem until it is actually implemented. Still, I enjoy the momentum being maintained in mainstream media in relation to the crisis.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/david-mcwilliams-tax-unused-land-and-the-housing-market-will-be-sorted-1.4584239

Tax unused land and the housing market will be sorted

Landlords will bring idle land into use pronto if they face a big cost such as tax

When we look at the housing debacle – not just in Ireland but all over the world – it’s not uncommon for people to argue that, in order to get the housing market going, we need to subsidise it more, give more tax breaks, reduce the costs and that this will bring land into use. All of this sounds plausible, but it’s all too intuitive. The counterintuitive approach suggests that we do precisely the opposite and we will get more land into use. Tax land heavily and more will be used and made commercial than if we don’t tax it. The reason is clear: if the cost of leaving land idle is low, then it will be left unused. If there is a big cost – such as a tax – on idle land, it will be brought into use pronto and the landlord will try to get as much commercial activity on this land as possible to generate the revenue to pay the tax.

Ireland is the least populated country in western Europe, yet we have among the highest land prices. It’s a stitch-up. It is really that simple.

AlmightyCushion

Bass Reeves wrote: »

That good investment. ROI is slightly above 8%. If you borrowed 150k the repayments would be sub 850/month. Even assuming drop in rent your should not have to subsidize rental income to cover mortgage. Two year of a tenant in situ is a good option.

People on here complaining about no property available in Dublin. With WFH that apartment was readily available to a single person or young couple buying. It cannot be far from the LUAS.

That property was not available to anyone other than an investor. It has tenants in situ.

Bass Reeves

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

That property was not available to anyone other than an investor. It has tenants in situ.

Incorrect. You can still buy it and then serve notice to tenant that you require the property for yourself.

Marius34

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Looking at the latest Property Price Index on the CSO website, it looks like nationally house prices have risen by just 2.3% since October 2018 to March 2021 (an annualised rate of under 1%). In Dublin the March 2021 price is almost identical to October 2018.

I've never seen house prices so static in Ireland.

You are right here, there where some sort of stability lasting for the last 3 years in regards to Irish property price. But those would be 2018-2020. I think that stability is gone this year.