Figures of NAMA Residential portfolio

wowy · 27-05-2014 10:55AM #1

I'm curious if anyone knows the actual number of residential units NAMA control, or have they released that info? Info such as vacant/occupied units, completed units, location/ghost estates, apartments/housing, etc.

Looking at the NAMA key figures (http://www.nama.ie/about-our-work/key-figures/) 13% of the NAMA portfolio is residential.

It's not a huge amount, and I thought I'd read somewhere that NAMA didn't really have a huge resi portfolio.

Just curious as I'm getting tired of seeing people (mainly Journal.ie comments; don't know why I bother) claiming that NAMA are largest residential property owners, should be releasing more units etc but not backing up those claims. To be honest, I'd imagine a lot of that 13% is uncompleted development (ghost estates), already occupied (rented out) or else just not suitable for occupation/sale (wrong location), so I'd wonder whether NAMA could realistically much of a dent in addressing lack of supply?

gaius c · 28-05-2014 03:10PM

10,000 apartments in Dublin city alone apparently.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/nama-sale-of-10000-apartments-to-shake-up-the-housing-market-29611569.html
That's almost three times as many properties are currently for sale on myhome.ie in Dublin county.
Massive, massive distortion of the market.

wowy · 28-05-2014 05:27PM

Those 10,000 apartments are already occupied though. Putting them on the market won't increase the number of available units in the city to rent. They won't be sold individually either as, realistically, Kennedy Wilson or another institutional investor are likely to buy the majority of these developments and continue to rent them out.

Surely what's needed is more new supply, rather than NAMA disposing of already-occupied units. I suppose NAMA can have more influence in this regard by progressing development on their land banks, rather than disposing of these apartments.

RichardAnd · 29-05-2014 05:36AM

wowy wrote: »

Those 10,000 apartments are already occupied though. Putting them on the market won't increase the number of available units in the city to rent. They won't be sold individually either as, realistically, Kennedy Wilson or another institutional investor are likely to buy the majority of these developments and continue to rent them out.

Surely what's needed is more new supply, rather than NAMA disposing of already-occupied units. I suppose NAMA can have more influence in this regard by progressing development on their land banks, rather than disposing of these apartments.

Are they really all occupied? That's a genuine question as I see a lot of empty apartments around Dublin.

Sleepy · 29-05-2014 08:35AM

Add that to the simple fact that it's not apartments that are in demand: it's 3/4 bed semis and it's effect on housing market would be minimal enough imo.

I'd agree with wowy on this: NAMA should be using their influence to get development of decent family housing built in the Dublin area. Perhaps where any unoccupied apartments in NAMA's possession could be used would be to provide rental / social housing for those whose mortgages are unsustainable and whose current homes need to be repossessed?

RDM_83 again · 29-05-2014 11:28AM

Sleepy wrote: »

Add that to the simple fact that it's not apartments that are in demand: it's 3/4 bed semis and it's effect on housing market would be minimal enough imo.

RichardAnd wrote: »

Are they really all occupied? That's a genuine question as I see a lot of empty apartments around Dublin.

The spiking rents for apartments in Dublin would make me think that isn't the case, and this rapid rise in rents seems to be higher than can simply explained away by increased landlord costs.

If you take a walk around the docklands or somewhere it appears many of the building probably have low occupancy.
Is it a deliberate policy of NAMA to drive up rent and property prices by holding back available supply.

gaius c · 29-05-2014 03:56PM

wowy wrote: »

Those 10,000 apartments are already occupied though. Putting them on the market won't increase the number of available units in the city to rent. They won't be sold individually either as, realistically, Kennedy Wilson or another institutional investor are likely to buy the majority of these developments and continue to rent them out.

Surely what's needed is more new supply, rather than NAMA disposing of already-occupied units. I suppose NAMA can have more influence in this regard by progressing development on their land banks, rather than disposing of these apartments.

Are they really? Have you proof of this?
Any of their developments I've seen have high levels of vacancies but it's a grand life to be a landlord who doesn't have to make ends meet.

The NAMA strategy for renting was to name a rent, not negotiate and leave it empty rather than accept lower rent. After all, accepting a lower rent would wreck their theoretical valuations.
This meant that their properties stayed empty for a long time as few would rent them at their extortionate rents but eventually the distorting effect allied to the rest of the market being broken has told and tenants have basically had to pay NAMA their ransom in order to have a place to live.
Still high levels of vacancies though.

Sleepy wrote: »

Add that to the simple fact that it's not apartments that are in demand: it's 3/4 bed semis and it's effect on housing market would be minimal enough imo.

I'd agree with wowy on this: NAMA should be using their influence to get development of decent family housing built in the Dublin area. Perhaps where any unoccupied apartments in NAMA's possession could be used would be to provide rental / social housing for those whose mortgages are unsustainable and whose current homes need to be repossessed?

There is no shortage of living accomodation in Dublin city. Census 2011 found 5% (of the units they were able to access) empty. This is double the vacancy rate during the 90's. If apartments were cheaper (and they really should be), young people would live in them instead of housesharing and competing with families for limited housing stock.

What's happening now is the consequence of the entire market being held to ransom and forced to pay through the nose for accommodation & thus bail the banks out by the back door.

golfwallah · 30-05-2014 08:49AM

Sleepy wrote: »

Add that to the simple fact that it's not apartments that are in demand: it's 3/4 bed semis and it's effect on housing market would be minimal enough imo.

I'd agree with wowy on this: NAMA should be using their influence to get development of decent family housing built in the Dublin area. Perhaps where any unoccupied apartments in NAMA's possession could be used would be to provide rental / social housing for those whose mortgages are unsustainable and whose current homes need to be repossessed?

Apartments may not be in as much demand as 3/4 bed semis, but this Indo Article says an Bord Pleanala has warned:

High-density homes, including duplex apartments with good public space and amenities, are the future of housing

I hope they are talking about much more spacious, family friendly apartments, than many of the 1 & 2 bed units built during the boom but even so, most people still aspire to owning the same type of 3/4 bed houses they grew up in as children.

The questions remains - how many buyers can afford these 3/4 bed semis and will bigger, family designed apartments be much cheaper and more atractive than existing apartment stocks?

gaius c · 30-05-2014 09:00AM

Really. It should be investors buying apartments and letting them out as cheap accommodation to those who need flexibility in their living arrangements. FTB's buying apartments is a nonsense that should be consigned to the re-runs of Reeling In The Years.

golfwallah · 30-05-2014 09:30AM

gaius c wrote: »

Really. It should be investors buying apartments and letting them out as cheap accommodation to those who need flexibility in their living arrangements. FTB's buying apartments is a nonsense that should be consigned to the re-runs of Reeling In The Years.

Your model of investor ownership and letting out their properties carries long term problems around security of tenure. Irish history shows that this becomes a big political issue.

The security of tenure issue with regard to rented accommodation has been addressed by other European countries in legislation which protects both landlords and tenants over the long run. I would put it to you that a similar legislative framework would be required in Ireland for your model of private landlord ownership to work in the real world.

Families and an ageing population need to know they won't be thrown out of their homes when market circumstances alone dictate the price of rentals.

gaius c · 30-05-2014 01:01PM

I'm only talking about apartments. Houses are a different kettle of fish.

I prefer professional landlords buying apartments and letting them out rather than former FTB's buying it and then turning into amateur landlords ten years down the line when they get a house with their partner but keep the apartment.

Farmer Pudsey · 30-05-2014 11:47PM

RichardAnd wrote: »

Are they really all occupied? That's a genuine question as I see a lot of empty apartments around Dublin.

They may not be fully complete. I have seen a few developments where while they look complete from outside the building there may need to be a lot of work to complete inside. Cost of fitting out compared to sale value is only coming in line now. Biggest issue with apartments is you have to final finish all of them from H&S and Fire regulations.

Other issue is financing same, banks are reluctant to give financing to finish these projects not sure why is a Priory park syndrome, not trust of developers/builders, finance sums being wrong.

Loads of people forget that NAMA was not set up to provide cheap housing or to develop sites unless it was a financial advantage. It function was to take over banking bad debts associated with property in general and to market these in a orderly manner to recover as much money for the tax payer as possible.

There mission is not to provide cheap houses to those that misread the bottom of the price fall and now want an artificial fall in property values so that they can avail of a cheap house or apartment

riclad · 30-05-2014 11:56PM

MANY of those apartment buildings ,may not be completely finished ,
or fitted out on the inside.
The property crash was sudden ,in 2008, so many builders could not get finance or else had not money to finish off some apartment blocks , that were 80- 90 per cent finished.
I think nama has some buildings which they won,t rent out ,
as this could effect the sale price if they are put up for sale in the future ,
I DON,T think theres a conspiracy to keep rents high ,
its more like market forces , or bad government policys.

kuntboy · 31-05-2014 02:03AM

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

to recover as much money for the tax payer as possible.

I hate this equivalence of government and taxpayer. You;re not a politician are you?

realitykeeper · 31-05-2014 04:11AM

There are a lot of clever economists involved in NAMA. When they speak about their money shuffling shenanigans - I don`t really understand it which is why I rely on common sense and my own intuition.

According to Michael Noonan, NAMA could make a billion euro profit for the taxpayer but I smell a rat. There is a massive mortgage arrears crisis and bankruptcies are going ahead every week with the newly bankrupt driving away in their new Mercedes.

If these loans were profitable then why did the banks not want them? This week PTSB said people in arrears could hand back their houses and walk away - they only have to pay whatever they can afford on the negative equity so presumably that would be nothing. So who picks up the tab for the negative equity?

Sorry Minister, I do not believe the taxpayer will make money from the banking crisis. I believe it will cost us tens of billions unless we get a new government that will tell Europe that the Bank debt was not taken on by the Irish people but rather by three companies which are in the business of country management.

These companies are called Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and Labour. Those three companies acted unilaterally without the permission of the people who contracted them to run the country called Ireland. Therefore those three companies owe Europe tens of billions of euros (not the Irish people).

Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, Labour, the Irish banks and their creditors should sort the mess out between them, it has nothing to do with the Irish taxpayer.

riclad · 31-05-2014 08:44AM

Nama took over propertys with bad loans,
they got houses at 40 per cent discount on the loan price approx.
There were 1000s of houses , apartments taken from builders who owed money to the bank and could not pay it.
IN 2008 house prices fell by 50 per cent on average in ireland.
SAY a builder goes out of business,its a limited company.
The banks had no choice but to take over large estates and
apartment blocks.
Some are ghost estates , where its economically viable ,these estates will
be finished and sold off.
Nama also owns lots of commercial buildings which it rents out.
IT may be holding on to some apartments in dublin which it will sell at a later date when prices rise.

Farmer Pudsey · 31-05-2014 09:15AM

kuntboy wrote: »

I hate this equivalence of government and taxpayer. You;re not a politician are you?

No I am not a politician. However on this forum there seem to be alot of posters that

Firstly want NAMA to dispose of housing and apartments in a disorderly fashion if they are all in fully finished is questionable.

Secondly want the banks repossess houses and sell off again in a disorderly fashion.

This will create an artificial price fall, however this will not solve the present housing crisis rather it will kick the can down the road.

Reality keeper we have moved on from trying to get rid banking debt from soverign debt. I believed at the time we should have defaulted on it however the Then two governments failed to stare the ECB down. We are where we are.

I always prefer to look forward rather than backward. Will NAMA make a profit in theory it will. I mean by this t will recover more money than it paid for the loans. However I am not cock a hoop about this as they in general bought the loans at a 60% discount and that leaves taxpayers in hock for the rest. However many felt at the time we might need to fund NAMA to the tune of another 10 billion we will not it looks like

On the other bright side the government will make money from it BOI holding maybe to the tune of over 1 billion. I am not sure how much it put into AIB but it may well break even or show a profit. The bogey in the house were Irish Nationwide and Anglo. It was downright stupid that we guaranted the historic bonds of the banks rather than just new one's on that infamous night but again we have moved on from that.

All of Irelands problems were not due to the banking crisis Everybody forgets that we had a budget deficit of a banking crisis ever two years back in 2008

realitykeeper · 01-06-2014 06:48AM

riclad wrote: »

Nama took over propertys with bad loans,
they got houses at 40 per cent discount on the loan price approx.
There were 1000s of houses , apartments taken from builders who owed money to the bank and could not pay it.
IN 2008 house prices fell by 50 per cent on average in ireland.
SAY a builder goes out of business,its a limited company.
The banks had no choice but to take over large estates and
apartment blocks.
Some are ghost estates , where its economically viable ,these estates will
be finished and sold off.
Nama also owns lots of commercial buildings which it rents out.
IT may be holding on to some apartments in dublin which it will sell at a later date when prices rise.

According to Michael Noonan, Ireland could make a billion euro profit from NAMA. Assuming he is not trying to pull the wool over our eyes and assuming this means that the everything that has happened since the night of the guarantee will end with a billion euro profit - that is great! However, I don`t believe it.

Perhaps Mr Noonan would like to buy NAMA and personally take on the 2008 blanket guarantee of the Irish banks along with the bailout package and all the good, the bad and the ugly which followed on from that. If he is telling the truth he will become a billionaire and who could begrudge him that. Alternatively, perhaps Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and/or Labour would buy the blanket guarantee along with NAMA for a euro. That would be mean they get the billion euro.

If they don`t its because the banking crisis will cost the taxpayer tens of billions. The fact is, if NAMA makes a billion, it would not even pay for four months interest on the cost of the bailout.

Figures of NAMA Residential portfolio

Comments