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
1781782784786787804

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 7,049 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    300pm would barely get you a box room in ballybane

    800pm is a room in a house share, not a twin room. Equivalent to the 300pm standard in 2015 which was a double room across most areas of the city. And neither is an outlier - 300pm or max 80pw was going rate for many years incl 2015.

    Looking at house hunting groups and daft ads for rents show few below 800 mark. Double or more of rent in less than a decade



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,187 ✭✭✭DataDude


    Even if you ignore the economic hardship, austerity etc etc of the period of 2009-2015, and focus solely on the fact property was incredibly cheap to both buy and to rent. Through that narrow lens, it may seem like some sort of paradise to look back on with envy…but it was utterly unsustainable.

    It was THE event which caused the housing deficit which many of the same posters longing for 2009 again give out most about today. It may have been brief relief for the renters of that era, and permanently good for the cash rich of that era (who could buy), but the 100s of thousands of units that weren’t built during that period, and all the tradespeople that left, and all the potential tradespeople who didn’t do an apprenticeship is precisely the cause of the pain of today.

    Wishing for some sort of Armageddon in the property market whilst simultaneously complaining there are not enough properties being built is hypocritical in my opinion.

    Post edited by DataDude on


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,613 ✭✭✭Villa05


    All the more reason to have or work towards a stable market today with product for all price points. We have the land, capital and the industry claim the labour can be got.

    That hardship was caused by overpriced property afterall



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,523 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    How do you stop those that earn more outbidding those who earn less?

    If the answer is build enough houses that there is cheaper houses for everyone, private developers will stop building long, long before that point is ever reached.



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


    do we have the capital? Without investors to bank roll it we don’t. And if you say government surplus it doesn’t even touch the sides



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 232 ✭✭Montys return


    Genuine question on the 2nd piece because I think you've made an interesting point, how do you think the problem should be solved?

    I still can't get my head around the paradox that rising prices to stimulate supply will somehow generate adequate levels to eventually reduce demand ergo prices. Should help with rents, but I can't see how people will be able to meet asking prices that can't already presently.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,523 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    People are meeting asking prices at present, there aren’t many properties remaining unsold. What is happening currently is that we have a larger population, increased numbers of higher wage earners, mostly in pharma/fintech, dual income buyers, not enough houses, coupled with poorly thought out rental legislation which caused unintended consequences. There are many, many other contributing factors like poor planning, parents gifting children large sums for deposits, the reluctance of home owners to support policies which devalues their primary asset, remote working, poor public transport etc etc.

    How do I think it can be solved? It can’t, there has never been a time when everyone could afford everything they wanted, despite posters nostalgia for the good old days when a single income could buy a house, a significant proportion of the population had to emigrate during those times because they had no work and couldn’t afford a house. Public servants/bank workers were the equivalent of our fintech workers of today, good jobs that made it easier to get a mortgage and buy a home. Ireland now has full employment lots of high income earners and people don’t need to leave to find a job, so of course that ratchets up demand for property and those same public servants are no longer able to get the mortgages necessary to buy a home. Times have changed, but teachers and Gardai are never going to earn the equivalent of an IT worker in high demand. Such is life and career choices.


    You read posters bleating on about the State building houses, to build in the quantities necessary to move prices significantly downwards would cost tens of billions, which we don’t have, expertise and oversight in the public sector, which we have proved we don’t have, and the will of the people, which we won’t get as it would cause the value of their homes to slump and trap many in negative equity.

    If you want more houses, you make planning easier and you incentivise private developers, not with threats, with tax incentives that encourages building even if the selling prices are falling. Posters may object to developers benefitting from tax incentives, but if they want more houses and the government can’t/wont build them, then you have no option but to look to the private sector, and they absolutely will not build if prices/profits fall below a certain level.

    Post edited by Dav010 on


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,687 ✭✭✭RichardAnd


    I'm not wishing for a crash. As it is, I'd lose out. My point is merely that for many people, a 2008 crash would be a welcome thing.

    One thing I do believe is that nothing short of a crash is going to change the situation here regarding housing. There was talk earlier in the thread that something in the order of 1.5 million units will be needed in the next 25 years to keep up with the demand. In my own town in Wexford, there are already major congestion problems due to population rises, and there are another 1000 houses planned for the area.

    For how long can chasing the infinite growth fairy be sustained? Is it even worth it? The only things that I see in the future are rising costs, declining quality of life, environmental damage and social decay.

    Anyways, that just my two cents.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,523 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Who are these many people who would welcome a crash like 2008?

    Are they people sitting on a cash pile, immune from the effects of a catastrophic financial meltdown, or are they idiots who have no comprehension of what it was like?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,687 ✭✭✭RichardAnd


    If you're consistently getting out bid on unremarkable houses or apartments by investors, the state or otherwise whilst simultaneously paying thousands on rent each month and watching your expenditures rise, how do you think you'd feel? As I've said before, if I were in that situation and I was ten years younger, I'd take my chances in a crash.



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


    I would also add into that the disheartening bidding process that is a haven for bad faith actors, so it is wasting of time as well.

    Hardly surprised people are turning to a burn the system down mentality. Politicians have shown zero intention of fixing the problem, and if anything are intentionally making it worse.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,523 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    If you were young enough to not understand what had to happen for that crash to occur, and the impact it had on life in this country, it may be possible, just about, to understand why they may think life would be better as you didn’t experience the crash. If you lived through that period, and now think it was a good time, then you don’t have the benefit of lack of experience as an excuse. Surely you understand that even if you were young again, there is no reason to think you would be unaffected by such a crash, and that you would be able to buy a house when banks would not lend to you.

    Post edited by Dav010 on


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,187 ✭✭✭DataDude


    I do understand that point of view, 100%. I just think it’s misguided

    Factually far far fewer people successfully bought their first houses in the period of 2009-2013. In fact I’d venture more FTBers got a house in 2024 than in the 5 year period of 09-13 combined.

    If we hypothetically say 75% of people who want a house get them now by age 40. In a crash we know that number will drop to 20% or less. If you’re not able to navigate yourself into the top 75% in a boom. Why would you think you’ll make it into the top 20% in a downturn? It just doesn’t stack up to any logical thinking. It just misdirected anger.

    There’s also the slightly irony that most people in their 30s (myself included) like to blame boomers for everything and selling out the next generation. A 30 something looking for a crash now, hoping to get cheap gaff, is selling out all the current teenagers as there would be an even bigger shortage of houses 10 years later.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,187 ✭✭✭DataDude


    5 years in government saw a massive massive increase in housing units built. The most in any 5 year period since 2007 by a country mile. Despite a 2 year pandemic and a global supply chain disaster. Record numbers of First Time Buyers getting houses, increasing every year.

    And in that 5 year period since 2019, house prices stayed the same in real terms.

    If they’re trying to make it worse, they’re not doing a very good job.



  • Registered Users Posts: 371 ✭✭Gary_dunne


    And in that 5 year period since 2019, house prices stayed the same in real terms.

    I'd have to really disagree with this point. My brother-in-law bought his house in 2021 for 400k (370 with HTB deducted), switching mortgages so had to get his house valued, currently value stands at 575k and houses in his estate went for 540k just last year.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,187 ✭✭✭DataDude


    I posted the official stats a few pages back. Real prices in Dublin down a good bit since 2019. Countrywide up slightly.

    I will say there has been some worrying signs in late 23/ early 24 of prices taking off again which is a real shame.


    22 & 23 were great years where wages outpaced house prices. If we had a couple more years like that then the affordability issues could have gone away in a controlled manner which would have been ideal. Let’s hope the recent moves upwards don’t continue.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,613 ✭✭✭Villa05


    Let’s hope the recent moves upwards don’t continue.

    This is the whole point. The increases coincide with additional government schemes to pump prices, should we have falls in rates, (which are already far too low for our economy) it will be further fuel.

    Feels very mid 2000s, imagine the pain that could have been avoided had we refrained from pumping property prices from 03 to 05.

    The big pressure point at present is rents, that's what needs to dealt with, not further pumping of buying prices

    Post edited by Villa05 on


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,187 ✭✭✭DataDude


    I think you consistently overestimate the impact of government interventions in the purchase market. I posted some stats on them a while ago, the new ones like shared equity represented a tiny fraction of the market spend. HTB has been around a long time now and its impact should be lessening each year as the price ceiling and subsidy amount are not being indexed.

    Price growth has kicked off again across most countries. Even Australia which was suffering badly is now soaring again. Generally speaking we tend to follow global trends. It’s not some little crazy Ireland bubble like it was in the mid 2000s. If anything our increases this time have been very tame vs others due to our relatively restrictive lending.

    Our overall house price to income ratios also remain one of the lowest in the developed world. You desperately seem to want it to be 2005 again but I’m afraid it just isn’t.

    Look at the increased income tax take over the last couple of years to see how well people are doing financially.

    I agree that sorting out the rental sector should be the absolute priority.



  • Registered Users Posts: 139 ✭✭SpoonyMcSpoon


    I don’t think I can agree with this.

    For many the current situation is unsustainable and I can’t but agree with that. In order to think that the current situation or even more increases to rents and house prices is sustainable, you would need to be a complete economic ostrich as it means that you think it is okay that;

    1. The rental market becomes socialised and State sponsored (currently 54% of tenancies get rental assistance in some form).
    2. Leverage in the housing market needs to increase (to keep up with house prices increasing) or else wages need to increase significantly (causing more inflation in the wider economy).
    3. From 25 years onwards the State will be able to provide housing for hundreds of thousands of people that were never able to buy (the generation that cane after the crash which are starting to turn 40) - where are these properties going to come from?

    All of the above are arguments that anyone saying current house prices and rents are sustainable is also making.

    So I do understand that there is ignorance on both sides of the fence between those that want a crash and those that want the current level of house prices and rents - these are both extreme situations in my view.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,613 ✭✭✭Villa05


    You don't have any source for the amount of first time buyer grants drawn down last year by any chance



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,321 ✭✭✭arctictree


    I know lots of people who bought during the '09 to '13 period. Mostly civil servants and semi state employees. They got bank loans and purchased houses at very reasonable rates. I know a specific couple, a guard and a teacher whose house is probably worth circa 1.5M now and they bought it for 300K in 2010. Some groups of people did very well in the recession.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,187 ✭✭✭DataDude


    https://www.revenue.ie/en/corporate/documents/statistics/tax-expenditures/help-to-buy-annual-report-2023.pdf

    7,200 total. C.75% for non self build. So let’s say 5,500 rounding up.

    60k property transactions last year for non self builds. So HTB is a MAXIMUM (not everyone will be eligible for this maximum due to not paying €30k in tax) of 10% of the purchase price in less than 10% of the houses bought last year. So you’re talking significantly less than 1% of the money being spent in the market last year coming from HTB.

    EDIT. Used some more numbers in the reports. Of the money spent in the property market in Ireland last year. HTB represented roughly 0.5% of it. As I’ve said previously. It’s a drop in the ocean. Shared equity is even less.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,523 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Mention pay cuts/pay restoration to that couple, see if they speak with joyous recollection, ask them if they would like another crash.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,219 ✭✭✭combat14


    in with the estate agent today and she said they could already see signs of strain with people paying e.g. 340k for houses the estate agent only felt were worth 280k could be quite a few burnt over the next while if this continues



  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,982 ✭✭✭hometruths


    As mentioned before, it's less than you might first imagine in the context of the whole market, but the FTB supports can only have an inflationary impact on new build transactions, so it makes sense to look solely at new build transactions.

    Last year 5300 FTB owner occupiers bought a new build vs 3,656 existing owner occupiers buying a new build.

    The average price paid by the FTBer for a new build increased by 8.3% in 2032 vs 2022, whereas average price paid increased by 5.8% by the existing owner.

    It seems logical to suspect it is likely to be having some inflationary effect on the transactions where it is in play.

    https://data.cso.ie/table/HPA02



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,187 ✭✭✭DataDude


    I don’t see any rationale why HTB would be having a YoY inflationary impact as it has not be altered since 2022? (I agree there may be some overall inflation in certain smaller cohorts in absolute terms).

    If anything on a YoY basis the HTB should be deflationary as its relative power in less than it was in prior years due to the non indexing cap and value.

    Only possible inflationary angle would be people earning more, so on average obtaining more of the maximum grant than previous years.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,982 ✭✭✭hometruths


    I was thinking about both HTB and FHS. 2023 was the first full year of shared equity scheme was active.

    In any event the point was not so much the YoY impact as the relative difference between price increase FTB's are paying for new builds vs non FTBS buying new builds etc.

    Price growth for FTB new build transactions is significantly outpacing price growth in every other segment - non FTB's buying new builds, FTB's buyings second hands, overall market prices etc.

    Yes, it's true to say that the financial value of FTB supports is relatively small beer in the context of the entire market's transactions. The overall market price growth was close to 4% in 2023.

    But I think it is a stretch to suggest the supports are not inflationary. If the rises for FTB's buying new builds was over double the rises of the overall market, there must be a good reason for that. It seems the most likely explanation is the supports available exclusively to FTBs buying new builds.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,187 ✭✭✭DataDude


    Last time I checked FHS was barely off the ground. Not sure the long term scale planned and if it could become inflationary. From what I remember the caps are very restrictive to the point it won’t be much use in Dublin and surrounds (similar to FTB)

    I’m not seeing the same numbers as you. I wouldn’t compare new builds to second hand as they just behave differently. There was a period in 2020 when second hand houses were going way up and new builds were flat. Then recently second hands were falling but new builds increasing. I think there is a lag based on the way new builds are sold with long delays to closing so YoY comparisons are distorted.

    So just looking at FTB vs SSB new builds. 2018-2023. FTB up 21%, SSB 21%. 2022-2023 only. FTB 7%. SSB 9%.

    There’ll be some volatility in the above so I’m not saying it factually proves HTB is absolutely not inflationary. It probably is. But it’s a rounding error if it is. It gets weaponised by certain political parties and unfortunately some young disenfranchised people catch onto it and genuinely believe with all their heart that if it’s removed that prices will fall dramatically (hint: they won’t)

    The total spend on HTB over the last 7years since it was created is €0.9bn. The total value of property transactions in 2024 alone was c. €20bn. It’s a fart in the wind. A complete and utter red herring.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,982 ✭✭✭hometruths


    I don't believe that prices will fall dramatically if HTB is removed, certainly not.

    But I disagree it's a fart in the wind. Nothing happens in a vacuum.

    Either way, my new years resolution was to agree to disagree on here, it's June now and still serving me well!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,219 ✭✭✭combat14


    any thoughts on HTB and FTB schemes - are they worth signing up for or is it a terrible idea to have the government involved in owning a portion of your new higher priced house when you may have been happier to buy an older cheaper house in the first place



Advertisement