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
1685686688690691804

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,618 ✭✭✭Villa05


    This is the only way, but gov won't do anything that stabilises or brings a necesarry correction in price. Homelessness and unaffordability are necessary in order to allow continuous house price appreciation

    We've moved beyond social housing being a priority, Ffg have made such a mess of this, what should be the priority is build to rent for teachers, SNA's, nurses, guards and all the other professions (public & private) that are required for the smooth running of our country

    This would flush out the land hoarders, knowing that a government acting on supply would devalue there land where they to continue to sit on it and do nothing. Remember alot of this land was sold by the state at fire sale prices in the last crash.

    Even the mere announcement of change in policy by the government towards supply would panic the land hoarders into action as they would rush to get there's built before the state

    Currently they are incentivised to sit on the land as the government continues with demand side policies, they know there land will continue to rise in value



  • Registered Users Posts: 487 ✭✭Ozvaldo


    Looks like you are better off packing in the job signing on and going on the housing list to get a house



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,618 ✭✭✭Villa05


    This has to continue because highgher and higher house prices and rents are far more beneficial for the Irish people and economy, until its not.

    We must persist with this policy regardless of the cost. There is no better way




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,457 ✭✭✭SharkMX


    I think we are just going to go for a 1 bed apartment. Just get it over and done with and get out of the rent trap. Its only going one way and we want out of it. If it come s to it in the future we will trade up, but waiting to buy and being outbid is just messing around while we watch both rents and house prices go up as well as supply coming down. Time to take shelter from the market and pop back up in a few years and see whats what. At least we wont have to pay rising rents in the meantime.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,202 ✭✭✭Padre_Pio


    I dunno, you have to plan to live there for the next 5 years, and whatever may happen to you (and your family)

    I have a colleague who bought a 1 bed in 2008, and only moved out in 2017, with a wife and 2 kids.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,457 ✭✭✭SharkMX


    tbh id rather live in my own one bed apartment with two kids for a few years than rent. We should be ok for a while though. No kids.

    Your own place solves so many problems no matter how small it is. If a problem arises that it becomes too small then thats just one problem. If you were renting when you had that problem you would have to first find somewhere (all but impossible), and then if you did find somewhere pay extortionate rent.

    At least if you owned the place your only problem is space and you have time to sort it out.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,984 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Interesting to read your comments, that you're ideally looking to buy a 3 bed house but will reluctantly go ahead and buy an apartment.

    No idea what age you are but years ago when my generation were buying first properties (2000 - 2005ish) everybody was buying apartments to "get on the ladder" with a view to trading up later. Nobody was thinking of buying 3 bed houses straight out of renting.

    The idea of the ladder seems to be totally defunct now, as most seem to be looking to buy their forever home on day one.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,202 ✭✭✭DataDude


    I would assume that is due to the average age of a first time buyer? The concept of laddering up makes sense if you get onto it at 23-25.

    It’s a harder sell if the first rung is at age 30-35. By the time you get to the 3 bed semi, it’s nearly time for downsizing.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,202 ✭✭✭Padre_Pio


    Average age of FTB is increasing, and to be honest, there's no value in apartments anymore, especially not the Celtic tiger-era buildings. You'd almost be better off to save a little extra and get a house.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,984 ✭✭✭hometruths


    That presumably explains most of it. My peers were looking at buying apartments mid late 20s, trading up early 30s.

    And I guess nowadays most in their mid late 20s cannot afford to buy apartments anyway, so they're skipping that step out of necessity.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,202 ✭✭✭DataDude


    Wish I wasn’t farting around trying to buy a new car in my early 20s and instead put the money down on a 2 bed in 2013. Although no idea if finance was coming back to the masses by then.

    Don’t know of anyone my age who even half talked about buying until late 20s. Perhaps a hangover from the crash where nobody was talking about it as a good financial move. Missed opportunity.



  • Registered Users Posts: 229 ✭✭danfrancisco83


    Exactly this. People saying it's more complicated than just getting on the ladder are wrong IMO. I was renting in a lovely area with great schools around and walking distance to the city, and the landlord said he was happy with us and we could stay as long as we wanted... until the RPZ came in and he magically found a nephew down the country that needed the apartment. Renting is just too precarious. I would suggest getting a 2 bed at a minimum though, even if it meant going a bit farther out. I'm not even sure banks will give a mortgage on the same terms for a 1 bed, isn't it 20% deposit at least? Also, there are lots of schemes like HTB etc. for FTBs, make use of them. You only get one chance at being a FTB, don't blow it. (FWIW I used HTB to buy a house 3 years ago that I now couldn't afford if I was to try buy it today, even with the 4X wage).



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,457 ✭✭✭SharkMX


    That was our plan but as much as we save houses are going up by more as we save. We are going backwards. Time to takle what we have and settle for something less than what we were saving for. That way we can jump ahead of the cart instead of watching it get further in front of us as we run to catch up



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,618 ✭✭✭Villa05


    I suspect you might have trouble buying an "entry level" apartment as that's what the state is buying and I would suspect the funds also as they may move away from financing building to buying existing stock



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,747 ✭✭✭PommieBast


    @danfrancisco83

    I was renting in a lovely area with great schools around and walking distance to the city, and the landlord said he was happy with us and we could stay as long as we wanted... until the RPZ came in and he magically found a nephew down the country that needed the apartment.

    My story is not vastly different. Moved into my (then) place in 2013 and until RPZ came along had never had any rent increases, but once it came in he would go as far as having the full rise calculated down to the single Euro. Eventually sold up. Guessing he was the type of landlord who previously only did rental reviews when tenants moved on.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,577 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    That was the way it mostly worked with a lot of LL's. They reset to market rents with new tenants. However those who understood the market better decided to change that system. A lot of LL's got caught by RPZ's.

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users Posts: 229 ✭✭danfrancisco83


    Turned out to be a blessing in disguise, gave us the kick we needed.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,512 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    I think the fact that FTB assistance via tax relief, grants or HTB have increased so much that people are holding out to maximise it and use for forever home.

    if these were removed from the market then I think there would be more activity with people trading up/down. This negative equity and the differential on mortgage min deposit between FTB’s and non FTB’s have had the biggest impact on the big reduction of people moving up down the property ladder.

    Like any intervention in a market there are unintended consequences. The other good example is RPZ’s and the impact they have had on rental market.

    I suspect that if governments didn’t intervene on housing at all we wouldn’t see half the problems.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,577 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    If the.most you can build is 30k houses a year and demand is 40-50k/ year over a 5-8 year period you will always have price pressure on houses both existing and new builds.

    What government support dose idms it loads the system towards those FTB's. Whether that is a good or bad thing is hard to decipher. On one hand these are the priority for housing. It probably also creates a construction industry that tends towards smaller units. However bigger units would tie up more labour during construction.

    A person moving looking for a larger units will also be selling a property. Most of these will have bought a property 10+ years ago. For those that bought 7-12years ago they will have decent equity build up in there house/apartment. Someone that bought an property in that period probably paid 50% of today's value and may have a 30+%of the mortgage paid off during a low interest environment. They would have been saving as well over the last 5 years as there repayments would have been moderate

    Government intervention was originally intended to stimulate the restarting of house building. However regulations and buyer expectations have made house building expensive. Because of this it relatively hard to withdraw these supports.

    Maybe the allowing of HTB for buyers of second hand properties will allow buyers to compete better with investors who at present would be out bidding first time owner occupiers for properties that decent returns in RPZ's

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,540 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Looks like foreign investors are still confident in Irish CRE. Perhaps it isn’t all doom and gloom.

    https://archive.ph/3UrlX



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,618 ✭✭✭Villa05


    If retail is down 30% and offices down more, it will always perk up interest

    Notable that investors are expecting more repricing and that they are looking at in student accommodation and offices with government contracts

    A state flush with cash should be looking at those areas themselves to reduce outgoings into the future and generate an income stream for a sector that claims to be underfunded

    however with recent declines in CRE values globally (across all sectors), they still see a degree of unrealistic vendor pricing in the Irish market, and repricing will have to go further for meaningful further investment in CRE



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,512 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    I understand why HTB was introduced. And yes it priorities FTB’s over other cohorts in the housing market. introducing it to second hand market would give FTB’s opportunity to more supply but that means it’s reducing elsewhere (I.e rental, social, trader up/down).

    Rental are somewhat capped on price by yields if it was previously rented but can still compete and outbid and as a result just push up prices.

    social housing whether via a AHB or directly with the council have targets to meet and money thrown at them so will definitely outbid FTB’s and push prices up.

    second hand / Trade up/down will be at a disadvantage to FTB’s and this is where it really matters as they will be buying and selling (unless they are emigrating) so will end up staying put and as a result less supply which pushes prices higher.

    At the end of the day unless the government build more and fast all that is happening is a game of musical chairs where the available supply to buy gets shorter every time the music stops.

    The only difference whoever is in government makes is whatever cohort they give priority to at the expense of others and the more they do this the more we will see unintended consequences that distort the market.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,512 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    Great idea get the government to throw more money at a problem that can’t just be fixed with just money.

    And the government are already doing what you have suggested via AHB…. I.e buying an asset which generate cash flows to buy more and repair existing properties.

    Did you ever ask yourself Why would the government increase its national debt by getting councils to build and as a result having to consolidated the debt into the official government debt figure which in turn would end up with the government paying more on its debt as yields on gov bonds increases all.

    The days of councils holding the asset and debt went out the window back in 80/90’s (along with trade unions in the private sector) when the likes of Italy got away with fudging its national debt so it would meet EU standards and look like they didn’t have a debt problem.

    Instead set up not for profit entity that is run as a business (aka AHB’s) and give them money which they can use as collateral to borrow more money and build houses and none of the debt is consolidated into government debt.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,057 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    If there's anything the irish are world leaders at, its accounting (or finding loopholes)



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,618 ✭✭✭Villa05


    I think it would be prudent for the state to purchase an asset that generates a return significantly greater than the cost of borrowing.

    Need to be very careful setting up a state wealth fund now as the everything bubble begins deflating

    14 billion in extra spending announced Tuesday, it's not like we need to borrow for capital infrastructure



  • Registered Users Posts: 625 ✭✭✭Cal4567


    I thought that was the issues with AHB, their debt is still classified as State debt?



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,495 ✭✭✭✭mariaalice


    It might just be market saturation as about 4 or 3 new developers are within 5km of each other.

    The 3 bed in the second tranch is 10k cheaper that the first launch on the other hand the second tranch of the 3bed in a development about 10km away is up 15k



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,937 ✭✭✭✭Thargor


    Sorry for off topic but who is the mod on this forum please? Need an old post with too much info about our house removed...



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,237 ✭✭✭herbalplants




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,747 ✭✭✭PommieBast


    Suggest using Flag button, and under Report explain the situation in the Reason section.



Advertisement