Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1616617619621622804

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 14,562 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Crikey, that is insane.

    Businesses want profit, and if your business isn’t maximising profit, your acumen has to be questioned. If they charge market rate, they are not gouging, and if you pay a gouger rather than someone who offers better value, that is on you.

    Your analogy is a poor one, it would be more relevant if you said it was like a hairdresser who isn’t busy, laying off un needed staff or closing a couple of days a week to reduce costs. If developers don’t see good market conditions, they quite rightly will wait until the market/costs improve again.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,513 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    It’s a business decision not political.

    if they increase lending rates they will lend less out as demand will fall off. Their Mortgage books will then start shrinking as more is being repaid than lent out. They then have to buy assets with a lower return than lending and Share price falls as a result…



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,450 ✭✭✭fliball123


    How is it insane I think a business hitting the stop button because they may not make as much profit as they were is insane. So what do they do? Can they afford to just stop and expect the business to stay viable? There is also a ticking clock of the shinners getting into power here and they have been quite vocal about how they intend to deal with developers. So once again can they afford to just let things lie and if so for how long? The two viable option they would of had up until now to stay afloat would of been loans which are now a hell of a lot more expensive and in 2 months time they will be more expensive again if they are looking to get by using credit and government interference which as pointed out now has a time constraint. So your opening line "business wants profit" I have pointed out now on multiple posts they have been making a very healthy profit margin and if they stop building they may well move from a "business want profit" mantra to a "business wants to survive" proposition. Also the knock on impact of them not building will be a further drop in raw materials less demand will push that price point lower.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,620 ✭✭✭Villa05


    Where did you see that?

    If they are going into mortgages, one would suspect they would launch a competitive savings product first.

    That may well be the catalyst for a flight or significant rate hike in deposits/mortgages at our banks



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,031 ✭✭✭Blut2


    But your argument was that developers would just not build and drop out of the market and that that would be a problem for the housing market.

    When in reality as fliball123 has outlined if developers stop building they very rapidly either fire all their contractors, or go bankrupt, or both.

    Which if the state had no spare funds would absolutely be a problem because the building of new houses would stop, and unemployment would rise. But for Ireland now thats not an issue, the state will just hire every single unemployed construction worker they can get their hands on for their own currently massively overfunded projects.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 14,562 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Ok, our State has little if any track record of delivering on big capital projects. You only have to look at the debacle that is the children’s hospital to realise how inept they are, and yet you think the State should undertake huge housing development projects? It would be lunacy.

    If the State did decide to become a developer, they would have to employ the very people some love to hate, developers and contractors for the projects. And we all know how that works out. Again, lunacy.

    My argument is that developers are profit driven. If projected profits make a site development a risk, then they will postpone that development until conditions improve. Yes they will lay off un needed contractors, they have done it before.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,450 ✭✭✭fliball123


    True they made a sh1tshow of the childrens hospital, but you have to be realistic. If construction stops the government have no choice but to pick up the slack and build and it could well play into their hands having a lot of construction workers not working and assets that developers cannot use and could be purchased on the cheap. Put it this way they cannot just sit on their hands either as the shinners are stage left waiting to enter the fray. Developers are in straightened times with regards to credit and how that impacts their liquidity and on the clock with regards to their buddies in government.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,646 ✭✭✭✭AdamD


    I don't think the state would start employing construction workers. They'd do deals with contractors instead.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,450 ✭✭✭fliball123


    That is true of "this government" as I said this option is now time limited with an election coming.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,574 ✭✭✭wassie


    Danish online bank Bunq is paying 1.56% interest, paid monthly. Easy to open with an Irish IBAN.

    I think there is a lot of decent cash amounts sittin in savings accounts for house deposits that folks are too scared to move for fear it will upset their AIP. In reality, any money sitting in a savings account of a regulated bank thats available at call and protected by the EU Bank Guarantee should not pose a problem.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭DownByTheGarden


    Wow. You would think we have never seen that happen before :)



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,450 ✭✭✭fliball123


    It happened in 08 - 12 yet back then we were knocking down ghost estates as we over built. The same cannot be said about today the difference is the number 1 issue within our country is housing. So you can smile and laugh about and deny this but the truth is if developers stop building they have no where to turn, a new government with the shinners at the helm will not be as pliable as FF/FG have been with regards to the protection of their really high profit margins and housing will be built with or without the current crop of developers. These guys have to make a decision to either build or hit the wall and someone else will do it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,574 ✭✭✭wassie


    Exactly. The state has no capacity to employ and manage construction works directly. To do so would require serious project/construction management & site supervision capability which the state lost years ago.

    It could be done, but setting it up would be a great cost and need to be a long term investment which is not politically compatible with short term election cycles.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,581 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    You can find the interview on the Big Tech Show Podcast. It took place at the Web Summit in November.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭DownByTheGarden


    Yes this time it will be different :) and builders will keep building when the arse falls out of the market enough to drop house prices significantly.

    I dont see it myself tbh.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,058 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    Builders will keep building if they can sell houses for more than it costs to build them.

    Based on construction costs, and large reported profits by developers its clear there is significant margin for prices to fall and building to still be viable. Not a hard concept to grasp.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,450 ✭✭✭fliball123


    No capacity are you joking they are literally crowing from the rooftops about the surplus we have got last year and over the next 5 years 65Billion is projected if they cant manage to build more capacity with that amount of cash then anyone not able to afford a house currently may as well pack a bag and emigrate. Housing is the number one issue and will be until it is sorted.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭DownByTheGarden


    Well theres a shock :)

    What will they do when it costs them more money to build than they make. Bearing in mind that breaking even or not much above is not making a profit either?

    Surely thats not a difficult concept to grasp either.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,204 ✭✭✭DataDude


    Personally, the hassle of even starting to look into that for 1% per year after DIRT really wouldn’t be of any interest whatsoever.

    If you were to split the population down. The only people deposit rates actually matter meaningfully to are people with very large cash holdings, no mortgage (as paying down will always be more attractive) and extremely risk averse (or else you’d be investing it rather than holding cash). That’s likely to be 95% older people who are poor with finances. I just can’t envisage a scenario where these people have even heard of Raisin or Bunq bank, never mind jumping through the hoops to set it up. I could be wrong but I think competition will be slow and be amongst the traditional banks (starting already) - not some random foreign bank.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,058 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    When is that going to happen? Hard building costs have dropped from the recent high related to lumber shortages and high energy inputs - the only issues really are finance and site costs.

    If the state funded development then the finance issue is resolved, and site costs are flexible and will increase/decrease as a function of developer demand.

    As the margins get smaller for developers to build, the amount they would pay for a development site decreases. With new vacant site taxes there is more urgency for a site owner to sell also, so they are less likely to hold hoping for a higher price in future.

    As an aside, heard on the radio yesterday some industry mouthpiece complaining that land rezoning taxes will mean higher prices for FTBs so they should be gotten rid of... lol yeah right. Heavily taxing any value increase solely as a result of rezoning land will bring prices down. Its only a good thing (unless your excessive margins are at risk)



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,574 ✭✭✭wassie


    The state does not have the capacity to directly directly project manage large scale construction projects. We outsourced it years ago.

    It takes more than just throwing money at it to rebuild that capacity. Essentially you would be creating a whole new bureaucracy.



  • Administrators Posts: 53,844 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    I'd say there are a lot of people receiving interest in their Bunq account who are oblivious to the fact they need to declare all the interest they've earned to Revenue so they can be taxed on it!

    I actually have my Bunq set up so I don't receive any interest.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,031 ✭✭✭Blut2


    I didn't say I was in favour of this outcome, I said it was whats going to happen. A more interventionist state, of the kind we're going to live in within 24 months, has very little need for developers when the government is chomping at the bit to hire tens of thousands of construction workers to build their own social/affordable housing at scale.

    "If projected profits make a site development a risk, then they will postpone that development until conditions improve." - how many developers do you think can afford to not build any sites for the entire length of a government (and possibly a second term), all the while paying 5-10% a year vacant site tax? Very few, the vast majority will be forced to sell their landbanks.

    Though for what its worth even in the corruption and poverty ridden Ireland of the 1970s, at a time when our population was half of what it is now, the Irish state still managed to build close to 10,000 social housing units a year successfully. So it is completely possible for the state to be building tens of thousands of social/affordable units per year.

    Thats much of a muchness really though. The outcome will be the same - if developers stop building, and stop employing, the state will hoover up any workers who become available to work on their projects. As contractors, as consultants, directly employed - all of the above or anything else.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,450 ✭✭✭fliball123


    OK so what do you see then lets be clear the arse has not fallen out of the market, prices are dropping due to prices being unaffordable. The top 50 developers made 10 billion last year so they are a long way from not making a profit. So what way do you think this will play out as I cant see prices rising not with interest rates going higher and higher



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,450 ✭✭✭fliball123


    Once again with the amount of cash flowing inwards this could be easily rectified by employing construction experts from outside of the current construction cartel and snapping up construction workers, sites and unfinished works left behind by construction companies who if they are not building will be hitting a wall and laying off staff (I dont see how they can survive the current paradigm they find themselves in). We may well be creating a new bureaucracy but if it was built on a non profit basis new properties being built would be a hell of a lot cheaper and more affordable. Its not like there is a choice, housing is now and for the guts of the last 18 months been the hottest topic among the electorate and anyone stepping up to the plate will have to have a definite plan going forward. To that point its not hard to see that the old guard in government is changing a lot will depend on how the shinners want to go about business and they have built up a head of steam by criticizing the current government and in particular how they have handled housing.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,574 ✭✭✭wassie


    I don't disagree with your sentiment. However creating a state enterprise that effectively competes with the private sector is challenging. Existing contractors I imagine would lobby hard against such a move on the basis of competition policy and the prohibition of State aid. Of course the counter argument is that it is in the interest of the state.

    One of the main reasons why most developed western governments have outsourced their project/construction management capability over the last 3 decades is that large scale building simply has become very complex and carries a lot of risk and outsourcing transfers this risk away from the taxpayer. (And it doesnt align with the philosophy of small Govt that has followed). Realistically though the taxpayer is always on the hook in the event a bailout is required in the national interest.

    The notion that the state will just swoop in and hoover up the best talent is fanciful at best. Do they start a bidding war for talent, feeding wage inflation?

    Besides, as has been mentioned many times here, most actual building work is performed by subcontractors. The layoffs you refer to would need to come from management of contracting firms. Many of the larger firms here are also starting to procure more work on the mainlaind in order to diversify their pipeline of orders so the best talent is not leaving anytime soon.

    So if a state run enterprise is not able to attract the best talent, how well can such an organisation be managed & operated and build efficiently. Building at any cost is not an answer.

    I like the notion that has been flouted before is to set up a dedicated agency to take social building from councils. That agency can then manage a panel of builders that are allowed to tender for works. Sharing the work around gives builders a reliable pipeline of work whilst the state can still get value for money.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,450 ✭✭✭fliball123


    It wouldnt be competing with the private sector it would be building housing for social and lower paid workers and it would take the heat out of the private market. Existing contractors can lobby all they want as if they are not building then they will only have themselves to blame. Sinn Fein coming in means that the old way of doing business is gone for these guys. The idea would be if these guys don't build they have no wiggle room and will have to let a lot of workers go that is when the state can snap these people up and there is also the option to attract talent globally with visas and a public sector job (with the likes of pensions and all the other perks that come with this)



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,243 ✭✭✭herbalplants


    Bunq seems to have poor reviews on trust pilot

    Living the life



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,019 ✭✭✭Jonnyc135


    Lumber has dropped, not sure on PVC windows insulation or piping, but concrete, blocks, precast, stone fill, tar, roof tiles have not dropped in fact a lot of main suppliers increased their prices for these materials in March and April.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,232 ✭✭✭combat14


    ecb warning as they mull next rate rise this summer


    House prices could face a 'disorderly' fall due to rate hikes

    European Central Bank review warned tightening financial conditions are testing the resilience of households, firms, governments as well as property markets

    https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/economy/arid-41151808.html



Advertisement