"average Dublin house prices should fall to ‘the €300,000 mark" according to Many Lou McD.

You heard Pearse talking and at this stage any sane human should know he is talking waffle. As I outlined above.

I could give a list of workers in office space who won't have transferable skills but I think you got the point.

No, no, no. You cannot afford a 300Eur flight if you a struggling to raise a deposit. That's the fundamental point you are missing.

I read this yesterday, and laughed.

Why would a landowner take 50k less?

Why would a developer take a lower margin?

Why would a finance provider offer lower interest rates?

Will you reduce your fees or accept lower wages next year?

And unfortunately I can't see VAT rates being cut, even though I agree with you on that one.

(b) I have shown above how to cut 97k from soft costs, without any change to hard costs at all.

You absolutely didn't.

You said land costs should fall by 30k - no info on how to actually do this.

You said profit margins in construction should fall - and this will entice builders to build more units, how exactly?

You said finance costs need to fall by more than 50% - this is dependent on international interest rates, over which we have no control.

I can see why SF policies appeal to you. Your idea is to let other people take a hit so you don't have to.

Those SCSI numbers always annoy me.

They work out "land cost" for a unit which is not a fixed number at all and is merely what some eejit would outbid some other eejit for because they know that some other eejjits will likely reimburse them the price and more. There is no justification for that to be a fixed number. A developer should have to operate like any other business - assess what they can sell the finish product at, assess what it will cost them to make the finished product, and from that, work out what the max is they should pay for their inputs. Not only do they set the figure at what it would cost to buy today, they add in 15% on top for finance.

On top of that they add in all the costs that it would take to do each little bit of actually building the house. Each of those costs includes the profit for the person doing the task because they are calculated based on what it would cost to subcontract out to another business to do it.

Then they charge for miscellaneous "fees" that are just what they need to do in selling a house.

Then they add in finance costs for all of the above. i.e. they aren't putting anything in themselves at all.

Then, on top of all that, demand an additional 15%! "Because I'm worth it" presumably.

You don't get the point. No other business would get to break down it's costs like that. Double count on everything.

QS don't value land btw as far as I know. They wouldn't be involved at that stage of the game

What is the land cost in the above example? You can't easily tell it from the calculation but it's 100k per unit. About 12k of that is to the builders pocket for their "margin"

I think you are confusing the role of a QS. But how and ever, it is irrelevant to the point about double counting.

To use your analogy combined with the SCSI logic, they can pay 5m for that land if they want because it will just end up as 8m to their overall construction costs demanded of the buyers. 1m of that will be into the builders pocket. Just for the land portion. On which they have zero risk of actually losing anything they put in ..... because they don't put anything in). Rough numbers for illustration purposes. 5m for the land, ~1m for the finance on the land, ~1m for VAT and ~1m for the developer margin.............before a foundation is dug.

I'd be happy to see developers with their larger margins if they were funding the projects themselves with their own money. But they aren't. They are charging the cost of financing everything (including the transferring or risk to the lender) and still demanding 15% at the end of it for themselves.

Sure but the govt are funding the whole show by effectively guaranteeing rents given so many developments are being acquired by or filled by local authorities.

If SF want house prices to fall, they need to encourage the ECB to continue to raise interest rates; they also need to halve rent support, this will cause the value of the underlying asset to fall, and they also need to work on the demand side by limiting immigration to those who have jobs (severely restricting non-EU workers who all seem to work in Tesco stacking shelves and in Superman's and other QSRs).

This is very radical stuff and would likely take years of legislation and legal challenges, because it's essentially voiding the right to own property which the Irish government cannot do.

If Sinn Fein are going to do this, they're keeping it very, very quiet.

LAs contracting directly with builders is great in theory, but if it means less money in the builders pocket, what's their incentive to do it?

Your take home pay is 40,000.

If you don't want to move home, move into a house share.

You can live off 1000 a month for 2 years.

Then you'll have savings of 56,000.

That's enough to buy something in Dublin. Or else in the commuter belt.

Problem solved.

Then save more money and in a few years, you can buy something better.

Genuine question here, what do you think is going to change with SF in charge, that is going to lead to you buying a property?

Either they build much more social housing meaning I can get a cost rental apartment for life, (this is the German, Austrian and Nordic housing model in Urban areas) or they end the tax breaks and benefits to the tech multinationals. The high paid foreign tech workers and the STEM companies leave and the price of housing in Dublin falls. This will be a return to regular white collar jobs wages being in line with housing instead of just techies

If all those tech and STEM companies leave Ireland you might find your own job in trouble if your PR firm has less clients to offer services to.

Good luck to you getting any accommodation then.