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

It says the cost differential is between 2 and 15% with the average being 8 and from what I can gather is an all size house survey. My theory would be that, what is being built ie 1, 2 and to lesser extent 3 bed units all smaller sized homes. The cost differential would be between the 2 and 8% with scope to reduce that through higher take up of the technology and less labour intensive home building practices.

With regard to taxing land, its difficult to tax land when the owners of same are advising and lobbying government on how to "solve" the housing crisis. So the measures introduced are continuously suspended or unworkable.

Coincidence?

With regard to land sold no better source than the horse's mouth

The head of the National Asset Management Agency has criticised the practise of landowners hoarding sites which should be used for housing. 

Brendan McDonagh was speaking at the launch of NAMA's annual report for last year.

While there is an massive shortfall of new housing, some land that can be used for building is still lying idle. 

I think your just trolling now. The numbers are specific

Land sold to develop 50,000 homes.

Only 3,000 under construction

The figures are from the head of the agency that sold the land. What's your issue?

It may have sold the land with potential of 50,000 homes to be build. But it doesn't mean that builders are hoarding it. It may happen, but possibly only small part of it. If they are close to Cities, with good infrastructure, and council does not object it, most of that land will see properties popping up. There could be many reasons why they don't build homes on those lands, other than purposely hording it. Builder are busy, running on full or close to full capacity, constructions are ramping up.

Are they verified by 3rd party, who not paid by said investor? Knowing how investor hedge funds work those stats are worthless.

what is your point ? These companies have financial statements which are audited. Does the company pay for the audit….yes like every other company in every industry.

1. And I agree myself that some hoarding happens, which I point before that it should be taxed. But it doesn't mean that for majority of land that gets sold to private sector are for the purpose of hoarding it.
2. He just expresses his opinion, it's not a research or report. How do you know that NAMA/Council is any better and do not hoard land?

1 The system we have and it's subsequent inflation at levels multiples of general inflation in housing incentivises hoarding.

No measure to prevent it.

2. It is the opinion of the head of an agency tasked with the unwinding of the largest land and property portfolio ever assembled in the world.

Its also from an Oireachtas hearing on the matter so a little bit more than an "opinion piece"

You didn't understand. I was merely giving an example of how hidden variable can skew your trend in opposite direction.

Lengthy article by Colm Keena in the Irish Times today (sorry if its paywalled) purporting how Govt Policy has been effectively reducing the number of available rentals since 2016 by pushing out small Landlords. Nothing in it that hasnt been discussed here before, but good that the conversation is being had.

And you trying sometimes to make sense from Sinn Fein. If I got it right, he is the main SF housing spokesperson, and goes against "evidence".

Ó Broin: ‘Its [Nama’s] hoarding of the land makes clear that they have contributed to inflated land costs, pushing up development costs and ultimately the price of buying or renting a home. State-backed Nama controls enough land to build at least 20,000 homes on but most of it remains undeveloped, according to new figures released by the Department of Finance."

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/nama-controls-enough-land-for-20-000-new-homes-1.4747306?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fbusiness%2Feconomy%2Fnama-controls-enough-land-for-20-000-new-homes-1.4747306

Ye miss the point, situation of oversupply to undersuppy in a matter of 8 years.

In that time of low interest rates state owned banks were charging up to 14% for resedintial investment loans

I recall posting last year of a housing financier charging 7% for resedintial loans that had the guarantee of government long term leases. Absolute madness in a time the state was getting finance at 0%.

The highest return on housing going to a profession that adds no value

What was the point in dumping the debts of the banks on our children and theirs if this is the carry on. Why not let them burn

The banks are still commercial entities. Do you expect them to loose more money just because the shareholding of the state.

You could not let the banks fail. Every economy needs a banking system to process direct debits, credit card trans and all the other everyday transactions that every person and business transact every day that involves a bank.

Simply ingredients saying burn the bondholders takes no consideration of the bigger picture.

A loan to a housing development that has secured long term leasing from the state would carry less risk than a loan to a couple on average wages with 10% deposit.

The process of negotiating, securing the lease plus the 7% interest plus change are all unnecessary costs added to the price and still not a brick laid

What was the point in saving all of them. If we had just saved bank of Ireland and not propped up the others, would ulster bank and kbc have remained.

Revolut have abandoned plans to base in Dublin because of frustration with cb over the granting of a licence. You don't hear that on newstalk when they are spouting about an anti business culture. Our failure to deal with bad loans in a mature and rational manner has blocked others from basing in Ireland

All anti business,

Maybe a loan for building properties for a property on long term leasing to the State would attract a lower interest charge the if so why are developers not doing so after all that's,what they do, they develop.

The reason the banks were saved was competition and also the sheer number of customers impacted had they of let fail would have caused chaos.

I fully agree with you regarding dealing with bad loans but this is Ireland we don't have the culture to deal with it. How many mortgages are behind where people are still in the property, how many tenants both social and private are behind in their rent and still in the properties.