Won't ever own a house !!

whizzbang

FillSpectre wrote:

Yes I am but before you go mental. Land does not just cover land in a normal term but servicable land. Re-zoning has nothing to do with that as unless the sewage works are there zoning doesn't matter.

If planning permission was given I think people would find a way of getting these services for themselves. Be it through local water co-operatives and septic tanks (hopefully not too close together .

I believe there is plenty of land suitable for residential buildings that are currently zoned as something else. Just look out the window of the plane next time you fly into your local airport, there is tons of green land around that could be rezoned if laws were changed to allow it. Hence, artificial scarcity.

gamer

if you buy house ,you can use rent a room scheme,earn 7100 tax free ,get tax relief on mortgage, also you get capital appreciation ,if you wait till you meet up with partner on a good wage,you may be waiting years,better to buy down country in the next year ,if dublin is too expensive,the situation is artificial too a certain extent because there is a shortage of serviced sites in dublin, thats upto the council ,fingal county council etc as regards their development plans for the next ten years.

Moonbeam

It is nice to have your own house and can be hard to get on the property ladder,but if you look on it as the house you buy now is just a start and will make things to come better,it is worth it:)
Places that have trai nlinks ot the city centre tend to be the best as you don't get stuck on the m1/m50/nass dual carriageway car parks in the morning.

lomb

chump wrote:

I just think houses are overpriced here.


I think on a combined 100k a year you should be able to live in a nice detached/semi-d house in a good location close to plenty of amenities and your work, and have your house paid for in no more than 25years. And also have a bit of spending money.

as an accountant or future accountant ul know that something is worth what its worth which is what someone will pay. on that basis they arent overpriced. either that or people are buying under compulsion to buy. either way prices are at market value at any given moment.

what uve said about 2 professionals on a good income in modern ireland living in a shoe box is very apt. years ago u could expect to buy a period house in D6 how times have changed. i recently viewed a house that sold for 2.5 million and the types of people viewing it with a view to seriously buying shocked me. they all looked very rough. the game has moved on, but the thing is u need to accept that inheritance will play a big part in years to come to most young peoples wealth. the young complaining about property prices on boards, in 30 ish years will be getting a load of money out of estates on average and probably ordering new mercedes benzs.

the joke is property is a zero sum game, when it goes up someone wins someone loses. but usually it comes full circle again as property is a transfer of wealth between generations... i wouldnt worry about it take it in your stride.

DublinWriter

Another factor to remember in why houses are in such demand of recent times is that years ago (well, 20 - 30 anyways) people got married in their early 20's, lived with the folks for a couple of years, then got a place for themselves.

Lately all the baby boomer generation wanted houses for themselves individually, thus doubling the requirement for houses.

DublinWriter

chump wrote:

1. renting is cheaper than buying, in a fair tests with all variables being equal renting is cheaper and often affords a better quality location, spec, + ...

Muah haw haw. Oh how wrong etc.

In 25 years time I'll own my own house and probably be a million or two richer by then thanks to it.

After 25 years of renting you'll have what exactly?

Oh, but renters have a better quality of life?

True, more money to spend on future skip fodder like PS2s, Plasmas, DVDs and other junk and more nights out in over-priced Dublin watering-holes.

I'd rather put my money in an appreicating asset than pay someone else's mortgage, thanks very much.

Oh but there might be a crash, slump, etc etc...

Listen, draw a graph of average house cost over time from say the 1950's onwards. That line is only ever going to go one direction - up. Sure there might be a slump, a blip, a readjustment, but the line will only dust itself off and continue it's upward trend.

The_Conductor

gamer wrote:

Look at,im an adult get me outta here program for tips, if you team up with friend,relative, go 50/50 ,40/60 on JOINT house purchase ,in dublin, in ten years time ,you could sell up,buy 2bed house in country,houses down country ,much cheaper , they are not building enough houses in dublin,therefore prices going up,ten percent, dublin is now an international city,like london, prices will ALWAYS go up, or buy apartment ,if you cant afford house,more people should look at joint house purchase options, theres social house and coops, building houses too.

Sigh.....
Joint house purchase optoins have an effective max of 308k (they will allow you use additional savings to bring this up to 321k, but no higher) Current average house price in Dublin is now 412k.

Prices will not always go up. While your exuberance is nice to see, unfortunately, nothing is ever guaranteed...... Japan has suffered deflation for much of the last 20 years, and prices are still below their 1985 levels in absolute terms.

I feel like a broken down record repeating myself.......

The_Conductor

DublinWriter wrote:

Muah haw haw. Oh how wrong etc.

In 25 years time I'll own my own house and probably be a million or two richer by then thanks to it.

Ok, you will own your own house. How do you make out that you will be a million or two richer by then? Is that if you sell your house- you will that amount in cash? What then?

DublinWriter wrote:

After 25 years of renting you'll have what exactly?

Oh, but renters have a better quality of life?

True, more money to spend on future skip fodder like PS2s, Plasmas, DVDs and other junk and more nights out in over-priced Dublin watering-holes.

Its called living.
Life is not just about money.
Some people are more than willing to make sacrifices in some areas so they can enjoy other areas. You- obviously are willing to forego the aforementioned items (or travelling / holidays / taking time out for further education / taking time out to care for parents or children- etc.)
Its a matter of priorities. Just because other people's priorities are different to yours does not make them any less valid.

DublinWriter wrote:

I'd rather put my money in an appreicating asset than pay someone else's mortgage, thanks very much.

At current levels and with projections into the future- were a person to rent instead of buying a property and invest the money saved on making mortgage payments wisely (I suggested the Irish Life and Permanent Forestry Fund in another thread and made growth projections), there is nothing whatsoever to say they will not have an investment greater in value than the resale value of your house.

DublinWriter wrote:

Oh but there might be a crash, slump, etc etc...

Listen, draw a graph of average house cost over time from say the 1950's onwards. That line is only ever going to go one direction - up. Sure there might be a slump, a blip, a readjustment, but the line will only dust itself off and continue it's upward trend.

If you would really like to see a bigger picture- I suggest you start at 1860 as a starting point and graph discounted asset values to the present day. (note: discounted values to take inflation into account) You will then be very surprised at just how false your above statement is. I did this for houseprices, timber, iron ore and alcohol as a biometrics exercise. Average adjusted asset price appreciation was highest and least volatile for timber than for house prices (indeed alcohol and iron ore fell in real terms).

There is no point in harping on about realism and realistic expectations. People are used to negative effective interest rates for the last 4 years. The country is effectively awash in liquidity. Excess liquidity chasing a constrained asset = increase in prices (until such time as liquidity becomes more constrained (such as by increases in interest rates) or the constrained asset becomes more freely available (expected 86,000 house completions in 2006)). So there are more houses being built, and money is not as cheap as it used to be- and looks like it is going to get a good deal more expensive.......

At the end of the day nothing is certain- if there was a such a thing as a "sure bet" there would be book keepers left. The prudent person would attempt to minimise their downside exposure.

chump

DublinWriter wrote:

Muah haw haw. Oh how wrong etc.

In 25 years time I'll own my own house and probably be a million or two richer by then thanks to it.
...

Did you read that whole post of mine?
Did I say ...

a. anything about renting for life? OR
b. Or did I explain that renting in what I perceive to be the current conditions in Ireland might be the better choice if the alternative is to buy something you can afford which you plan to upgrade in later years?

It's an a or b answer... go read my WHOLE post

Also smccarrick, it's very interesting what you say about "houseprices, timber, iron ore and alcohol as a biometrics exercise. "
Regarding the point "there is nothing whatsoever to say they will not have an investment greater in value than the resale value of your house.", the one benefit of house purchasing/mortgage borrowing is that if there was a similar appreciation in the value of house vs. particular investment, the fact that you geared up on the house would obviously lead to it being a substantially superior investment.
I'd be very interested to see how great the appreciation in stocks(shares) versus homes is/was over a certain well defined period and if at any stage recently they diverged greatly. Obviously you'd have to generalise the gain over a specified geographical area versus stock increases in the same area - the US would be an interesting example.

hmmm

I'm an accountant as well, so can hardly be accused of not understanding money. Listening to the absurd mathematics from the pro-"house prices can only go up" people on this thread I have never been more convinced that we are going to see a heavy drop in prices over the coming years.

Rent is dead money!
Get on the ladder!
Prices can only go up!
In the long term you will never lose!
Your house is your pension!
Borrow invest lather rinse repeat!

DublinWriter

smccarrick wrote:

Prices will not always go up. While your exuberance is nice to see, unfortunately, nothing is ever guaranteed...... Japan has suffered deflation for much of the last 20 years, and prices are still below their 1985 levels in absolute terms.

Yes, a heavily industrial far-eastern economy on the other side of the planet similar to ours because...?

I'd prefare to cite the UK when making comparisons.

smccarrick wrote:

I feel like a broken down record repeating myself.......

Me too.

latenia

I have to come into this firmly on the side of renting in current market conditions and using my own situation as an example. I'm sharing a very large period house in D6 with 2 others. It's in superb condition, with our own garden and more than 1 reception room each on top of our bedrooms to do our own thing.

Being very conservative in estimating its market value and repayment terms of a mortgage, I would still guess a monthly repayment of about €10,000 if I wanted to buy it. We pay €2,000 in rent between us. This is good value by anyone's standards. There's not a chance in hell I could afford to buy a place like this until I'm too old to actually enjoy it.

Others are quoting the old line of rent being 'dead money'. I don't see how it's any deader than interest to a bank.

I use the example of what I could afford to buy as a contrast, which would be a new-build far outside Dublin.

My daily commute is about 10 minutes each way; most people buying in further-out places would be looking at at least 2 hours in total. In purely monetary terms I would value my time at about €20 an hour. This is before one even begins to consider the social and psychological pressures of fighting your way to and from work each day to arrive home to some bland estate far from any amenities. The difference between getting home at 5.30 each day and possibly around 7 as well as an extra hour in bed is massive. The quality of life factor isn't a side issue here-it's hugely important.

When you look at each situation in terms of a pension or investment, it really depends on how the individual themselves manages their money. In annual tax credits mortgage holders are favoured by €500, but the chances are that a renter will have more spare cash to put in a pension fund, getting 42% relief.

I also think there's some naivity, both on this thread and in the country in general, regarding the potential and desirability of their property as an investment. I can easily see whole estates of three bed semis in places like Navan, Enfield or Delgany full of for-sale signs in 15 or 20 years, all of whose owners thought they'd be millionaires.

DublinWriter

smccarrick wrote:

Its called living.
Life is not just about money.
Some people are more than willing to make sacrifices in some areas so they can enjoy other areas. You- obviously are willing to forego the aforementioned items (or travelling / holidays / taking time out for further education / taking time out to care for parents or children- etc.)
Its a matter of priorities. Just because other people's priorities are different to yours does not make them any less valid.

Quite true. Before I eventually bought two years ago, I was renting. Like most people here I was in denial mode, when I came back to Ireland in 2002 I couldn't believe people were paying 280K for Semi-D's in Raheny and I thought I'd hold out. Those same houses are worth just under 550K today.

Oh how wrong I was at the time and I regret those years paying someone else's mortgage off before I got a place of my own.

My 210K mortage costs me just over a fraction of what I earn a month. Had I decided to say in the apartment in Sutton I was initially renting, I'd be paying almost 2K pa now.

As for further education, I'm paying the best part of 10K to do an MSc part time in TCD. Within reason I can holiday when and where I want and I can spend as much time as I want with friends and family.

What I'm basically trying to say it that your arguement is self-defeating. If Irish property prices have been so over-valued in the past two years, then why hasn't the bottom dropped out of the market already?

They will continue to rise, but not as dramatically and will eventually begin to track inflation in 5 years IMHO.

The great white-hope for the property pessamists is a sudden rise in interest rates. Unlike what happened to Sterling in the early 90's (Soros, Lamont, interest rates going up four times in one day), there will be no Euro currency crises. It's a Juggernaut of a currency, whom many analysists consider to be still undervalued and with many OPEC countries considering switcing oil-trading from US Dollars to Euros.

smccarrick wrote:

At current levels and with projections into the future- were a person to rent instead of buying a property and invest the money saved on making mortgage payments wisely (I suggested the Irish Life and Permanent Forestry Fund in another thread and made growth projections), there is nothing whatsoever to say they will not have an investment greater in value than the resale value of your house.

Crap. Just look at the basket case that the global equitites market became post dot-com boom and post 9/11.

My private pension fund is managed by Eagle Star, one of the most respected fund managers in the country. I started the fund in 1998. My position in 2003 was that 75% of my fund had been invested in equities and that the fund value was about 20% that the value of my contributions. In other words, I had lost 25% of my money and would have been better off had I just kept my contributions and stashed them under my matress.

Only in 2005 did the fund yield about 105% of my total contributions and hopefully it's turned the corner.

Now I now you're fond of quoting your favourite example of the Irish Forestery Fund as a template of how well certain funds can do, but as you said yourself, we'd all be rich if we had the benefit of hindsight. As they say after those ads on the radio, the value of funds can go down as well as up and past performance is no indicator of future performance. The third issue of the Irish Life Forestry fund made 8%, but that's no indication that the fourth offer will do the same.

And as funds go, the Forestery Fund you mentioned is a pretty lame duck. I've just pulled out the BOI "Your Guide to Life & Pentions Investment Performance" Q3, 2005 and most of the 'specialist funds' average out in a 5 year span to return 15%.

I'll sum it up by giving everyone here the advice I received so many times and neglected to heed in my 20's - "you never lose money on bricks and mortar".

DublinWriter

latenia wrote:

I use the example of what I could afford to buy as a contrast, which would be a new-build far outside Dublin.

Consider the changing demiographic of commuting in this country.
As people working in Dublin, we've been basically spoilt up to now.

When I worked in West London, most people were doing an 2-hour commute in from the home counties between 30 and 60 miles away.

Here, we crow about having to travel more than 10 miles to work.

Dublin is becoming more and more like London from a work perspective everyday. Yes I know we don't have the same good level of public transport, but as an urban growth model, it's following the same patterns of expansion.

Saying that house prices are expensive in the Raheny/Dundrum/Killester/Dun Laoghaire areas is a bit like Londoners whinging about the house prices in Kensington, Chelsea, Ealing and the Docklands.

utopian

DublinWriter wrote:

Consider the changing demiographic of commuting in this country.
As people working in Dublin, we've been basically spoilt up to now.

When I worked in West London, most people were doing an 2-hour commute in from the home counties between 30 and 60 miles away.

While, that was your experience, the London Travel Report 2005 does not seem to support the more general point.

Commuters working in central London take on average 55 minutes to travel to work, compared with 32 minutes for commuters working in outer London and 23 minutes for the rest of Great Britain.

Are there reliable figures for Dublin/Ireland?

latenia

To Dublin Writer, you've really just negated every point you've made. Myself and others used the word current several times in this discussion. You bought your home 2 years ago. This is not current.
Repeating hackneyed old phrases about bricks and mortar does not make you some kind of economic sage; every Tom Dick and Harry in the country has been coming out with this stuff for years.
This is the essence of a bubble, from tulips to dot-coms, where large sections of a population are jumping into the same market, chasing profits on a commodity far above its intrinsic value.
I honestly feel that buying in the next year or so would be akin to joining a giant pyramid scheme, with developers and property owners at the top.

In the news today:

http://www.rte.ie/business/2006/0606/stocks.html

This to me is dead money; some faceless bureaucrats in Frankfurt at a stroke of a pen removing a chunk of your monthly income

DublinWriter

latenia wrote:

This is the essence of a bubble, from tulips to dot-coms, where large sections of a population are jumping into the same market, chasing profits on a commodity far above its intrinsic value.

True, but can you give me an example of any property bubble? Specifically European? Maybe in the last 100 years too?, as I'm feeling generous.

Look, if quoting today's news from RTE about Elan going wobbly again makes you feel any better about renting then great. Boards, like any other internet forum only to re-enforces our existing beliefs, we don't come on here to radically change our world view.

Personally, I'm looking at a 25-year projection. I agree with most in here abount a slump happening in the next 5 years, but over the long term, property is the safest and most profitable bet.

chump

DublinWriter wrote:

Personally, I'm looking at a 25-year projection. I agree with most in here abount a slump happening in the next 5 years, but over the long term, property is the safest and most profitable bet.

But DublinWriter again here your contradicting yourself and your opinions expressed in other posts. If there is going to be a levelling off or slump sometime soon, then NOW is hardly the time to buy, is it?
Especially if you're buying with a view to upgrading in a few years time?

Fair enough if you're buying a home today that you plan to live in for 25+ years, but is that the case for many?

You're also saying we can't compare Ireland to other non-european countries with regards to property bubbles bursting, or a "heavily industrial far-eastern economy", but then you compare Dublin to London, a city with 7.5 million in its metropolitan area, with commute times favourable or many in Dublin,

While, that was your experience, the London Travel Report 2005 does not seem to support the more general point.

Quote:
Commuters working in central London take on average 55 minutes to travel to work, compared with 32 minutes for commuters working in outer London and 23 minutes for the rest of Great Britain.

Are there reliable figures for Dublin/Ireland?

Also from wiki...

As Europe's largest city economy, it generated $365 billion in 2004 (17% of the UK's Gross Domestic Product[citation needed]) although this only refers to the city proper. The economic impact of the entire London metropolitan area is far higher, year-on-year accounting for approximately 30% of the UK's GDP or $642 billion (estimate) in 2004[citation needed]. London's biggest industry is finance, and its financial exports make it a large contributor to the UK's balance of payments. The City is the largest financial centre in London, home to banks, brokers, insurers and legal and accounting firms. A second, smaller financial district is developing at Canary Wharf to the east which includes the global headquarters of HSBC, Reuters, Barclays and the largest law firm in the world, Clifford Chance. 35% of global currency transactions occurred in London as of 2005[citation needed] (an average daily turnover of $613 billion), with more US dollars traded in London than New York[citation needed], and more Euros traded there than every city in Europe combined[citation needed]. London is host to many company headquarters. More than half of the UK's top 100 listed companies (the FTSE 100) and over 100 of Europe's 500 largest companies are headquartered in central London. Over 70% of the FTSE 100 are located within London's metropolitan area. Media and professional services are important sectors.

It just isn't comparable to Dublin. We have administration centres in Dublin, London is an engine. The money made in it is phenomenal.

mikemac

One quick point.

If a crash or correction is likely, why are property developers buying up land in D4 at huge prices?

I thinking of Sean Dunne and the Jurys site as an example.

Surely, these succesful businessmen know what they're doing. Are boards members ready to call fantasticaly succesfull men fools as they're about to lose all their money. I 'd have thought they'd know more about the property game than anyone else around

Maybe they are wrong. But they are putting their money on the line and while I don't claim to be a expert on this, I have to respect what they're doing and find it reassuring that there wont be a crash, at least for the next 3 years.

chump

micmclo wrote:

Surely, these succesful businessmen know what they're doing. Are boards members ready to call fantasticaly succesfull men fools as they're about to lose all their money. I 'd have thought they'd know more about the property game than anyone else around

Are you mad? These property tycoons don't invest their own money! Very little of it anyway you can be sure.

micmclo wrote:

Maybe they are wrong. But they are putting their money on the line and while I don't claim to be a expert on this,

There is a big difference in providing high quality accomodation in the most prestigous parts of the city versus providing sub-par standard accomodation in the back-end of nowhere.

micmclo wrote:

I have to respect what they're doing and find it reassuring that there wont be a crash, at least for the next 3 years.

Nobody knows tbh.

dazberry

DublinWriter wrote:

Personally, I'm looking at a 25-year projection. I agree with most in here abount a slump happening in the next 5 years, but over the long term, property is the safest and most profitable bet.

You've been talking about long term projections all along but the key thing is as you mentioned in your second post:

DublinWriter wrote:

Probably not, because if you did you'd realise that those who managed to weather that storm are now sitting on some seriously valuable property.

That's fine for those that weathered the storm, but the issue will be those that can not. For example I would consider a lot of the buy to rent second property investments as very fragile. AFAICS a lot of people have very little capacity to support these properties should there be a short-term drop in rental demand for example - and the only contingency will be to sell. It could all turn very ugly...

D.

Calina

DublinWriter wrote:

Consider the changing demiographic of commuting in this country.
As people working in Dublin, we've been basically spoilt up to now.

When I worked in West London, most people were doing an 2-hour commute in from the home counties between 30 and 60 miles away.

Personally, when I lived in London, it used to take me 20 minutes to get to work. But I was a special case being a full time student and in student accommodation near Oxford Street.

However, when I lived in Paris, and was a regular commuter and tax payer, it took me ten minutes to get to work. The fact that things in Dublin are getting like London is not something to be lauded - it is a shocking, shocking failure to learn from the mistakes of other countries.

Ultimately, you really should accept that what is right for you and your life may not even come close to matching other people's lifes, incomes, needs. Personally, if I could have bought property 5 years ago, I would have, but even then, the gap between what the bank would give me and what a property would cost was excessive, running to circa 100K. Castigating me for not doing it is unfair and arrogant.

In other words - do not assume everyone is earning the same amount as you, and do not assume their financial profile is the same.

lomb

chump wrote:

Are you mad? These property tycoons don't invest their own money! Very little of it anyway you can be sure.


There is a big difference in providing high quality accomodation in the most prestigous parts of the city versus providing sub-par standard accomodation in the back-end of nowhere.


Nobody knows tbh.

none of thats true, the banks arent fools, they wont lend more than 50% of the lan to value for development land without planning. this means that the other 50% +9 % stamp duty is made of advancing cash or alternatively a first charge over other unmortgaged property.

for instance this could mean advancing 100 million euro of fully owned property to cover the loan. no one in their right mind will do this if they didnt believe 100% in what they were doing. imho sean dunne and the guy behind glenkerron homes are very clever(bought under 3 acres for 170 million) they will walk away with an easy 150-200 million each for their punt.

they know apartment living is new to ireland. theyl sell their 1million euro flats without breaking a sweat. they know they have 4-5 years to do this absolute max before the market for flats saturate and the market tanks.

theyl be in and out with a couple of hundred mill before this happens..

FillSpectre

chump wrote:

The tone, content and exectution of your posts says one thing to me: "please ignore". I'm not bothered getting involved in a slagging macth, so rest easy.

Actually I am sure you read it replied and then edited your post afterwards with this amazing retort.

You really are rehashing points made a lot better by other people who know what they are talking about.

Every time you go to expand them it seems you fall down.

So far you have suggested you know who rents and who invests what these people will do. The fact is your premise isn't particularly inaccurate it is your assumption that are. Your desire to own has obviously clouded your judgment.

Feel free to ignore this as you will anything that might give you more insight into the subject you are trying to analise

chump

lomb wrote:

none of thats true, the banks arent fools, they wont lend more than 50% of the lan to value for development land without planning. this means that the other 50% +9 % stamp duty is made of advancing cash or alternatively a first charge over other unmortgaged property.

for instance this could mean advancing 100 million euro of fully owned property to cover the loan. no one in their right mind will do this if they didnt believe 100% in what they were doing. imho sean dunne and the guy behind glenkerron homes are very clever(bought under 3 acres for 170 million) they will walk away with an easy 150-200 million each for their punt.

they know apartment living is new to ireland. theyl sell their 1million euro flats without breaking a sweat. they know they have 4-5 years to do this absolute max before the market for flats saturate and the market tanks.

theyl be in and out with a couple of hundred mill before this happens..

It could happen that high-end locations never tank at all. There could be a country wide property crash and top-end locations aren't affected.
Also you sums on how a property tycoon can make money are fairly obvious, and obviously these men are putting some money on the line, but in reality you'll find a plethora of banks/investment groups and cronies all at greater risk (when combined) than the actual ringleader himself, eg. sean dunne. My point is that even if there was a property crash to think for a minute that the "Are boards members ready to call fantasticaly succesfull men fools as they're about to lose all their money. " is ridiculous. They might take a small hit on outstanding moves, but I would wager that they'd come out of a property crash better off than when they went in - if they were as smart as one would like to think.

Sure even look at the life-cycle of these investments, they turn them over as quick as possible. And once the site is purchased building costs are usually paid for by phase1 buyers, or even deposits made before any plans. And what kind of credit arrangement do they have with suppliers etc.?

And the lender may view the actual land itself as substantial security, particular in the hands of a well respected tycoon.
I think you might be surprised at the real exposure of sean dunne himself.

Also your comment "none of thats true" while quoting me, I assume means you...
1. You believe property tycoons (themselves) have the greatest exposure when purchasing land?
2. You don't believe high quality accom. in prestigous locations have a greater chance of holding their value in a downturn as "sub-par standard accomodation in the back-end of nowhere."
3. You don't agree that nobody knows when or if there'll be a property crash.

chump

FillSpectre wrote:

Actually I am sure you read it replied and then edited your post afterwards with this amazing retort.

Very wrong pal. Guesswork maybe isn't your forté.

FillSpectre wrote:

You really are rehashing points made a lot better by other people who know what they are talking about.

Of course I'm rehashing points, and of course there are people who know what they're talking about more than me. Does that not mean I can collate opinions and informationa and form my own opinion and express it on here?

FillSpectre wrote:

Every time you go to expand them it seems you fall down.

I haven't expanded on much really after the one post I had that outlined my main reasons. Which I don't even think you read (quote it and criticise it)

FillSpectre wrote:

So far you have suggested you know who rents and who invests what these people will do. The fact is your premise isn't particularly inaccurate it is your assumption that are.

What have the 200,000 immigrants in this country done almost as soon as they arrived? Rented accomodation. What do huge swathes of less well off do - rent. Yes of course students rent, and people who can afford to buy rent, but they're no doubt in the minority or in a transitional phase.

FillSpectre wrote:

Your desire to own has obviously clouded your judgment.

I've no desire to own or rent at the minute. My only desire at the minute is to live somewhere comfortable in realitive proximity to work and hopefully in a few years earn enough money to have the opportunity to buy something that suits.

FillSpectre wrote:

Feel free to ignore this as you will anything that might give you more insight into the subject you are trying to analise

You've given me ZERO insight. From all you've written I don't even know what you're trying to say. All I've heard from you is - I bought a few years ago, I did good.

Nothing else. And also the majority of people on here are able to communicate without trying to get personal or undermine the person who's writing. Instead people usually attack the argument. You seem incapable of this, and so I have little respect for you or your ramblings.

TheBigLebowski

I find these posts where people break down a post and argue every point separately very annoying. They should be banned.

P.S. Prices are going up, up, up forever. Wahey!

gamer

most people dont know, you can go to local council get mortgage from them on any private property subject to survey, if you are first time buyer,or else go on low cost housing list,ie you buy house for cost price,dublin, 180k, if you are earning under 40k single person,or 80k limit for a couple.So if you think i need 380k to buy house in dublin you are not doing full research on this subject.There are many options avaidable to choose from.SOME people think you need to be on welfare to get help from local council ,fingal council or housing authority,thats not true.The return from buy to let is 3percent approx, they are buying cos they think of future capital value growth ,and the stock market is looking very precarious,volatile.If you buy in a town that has a good rail link to dublin,you,ll get good value for your money.YOU can get a lovely house outside dublin for 180 k or less.If you want an investment buy where theres a university or institute of technology within 3miles .

lomb

chump wrote:

I think you might be surprised at the real exposure of sean dunne himself.

Also your comment "none of thats true" while quoting me, I assume means you...
1. You believe property tycoons (themselves) have the greatest exposure when purchasing land?
2. You don't believe high quality accom. in prestigous locations have a greater chance of holding their value in a downturn as "sub-par standard accomodation in the back-end of nowhere."
3. You don't agree that nobody knows when or if there'll be a property crash.

1whatever sean dunne and his ilk pay for a site, their exposure is 50% in 'cash' or by a first charge over other property they own. the banks exposure is minimal considering the security. banks sell money like tesco sells bread, they make sure they have collateral before they lend though. thats credit control 101.

2 i dont believe apartments in the future will be worth much. u are buying 10 tonne of concrete in the sky. not worth alot in my book regardless of location and certianly not worth 1 mil. houses in prestigious locations are a GREAT buy dont get me wrong.
3 i do agree with that, but on the odds there will be no crash for 4-5 years, while the government is gearing up to spend all the tax revenue of the boom years on the national developlement plan. this is many many billions of euro and will keep the tiger afloat long enough for the developers to bail when supply curve and demand curve of flats meet and overshoot. they know that they have 4 years and they will time their exit perfectly. mark my words..

gamer

i heard on newstalk today the council lowcost income limit is 55k,they do 50/50 loan/rent on a private property if you cant afford a full mortgage.When your income go,s up you can go to full mortgage