NAMA - Trying to inflate that conmstruction bubble

Sand

@Later12

This goes further than the construction industry, and right into the macroeconomy. Entrepreneurship has taken a serious hammering in this country, and is continuing to do so in light of the banks and the SME sector. In an era where progress and economic development are of major importance, I fear Ireland is in for a long run of conservative, anti-development superstition where anything but the humblest of economic policies or business projects will be popularly derided.

I'd love to be proven wrong on this, but I think there is a genuine danger that Ireland is in no hurry to get back on the horse from which it has fallen, and it's possible our economy will be the more wobbly for it for some time.

Oh Please. This is not entrepreneurship of any sort. Its a group completely unqualified bureacrats making *incredibly* stupid bets with other peoples money. Bets so *incredibly* stupid that even Irish banks wont touch them with a barge pole.

NAMA is a symptom of a deep, institutional hatred of entrepreneurship - as far as Official Ireland is concerned, entrepreneurs are the enemy. The average Irish person doesnt have any unusually strong feelings on entrepreneurs Id think - so long as they take their losses with their gains most people are fine with that.

NAMA was founded to prevent normal market rules applying - to prevent Official Ireland from taking losses. Trying to paint this up as some brave, plucky little entrepreneurs taking a researched and calculated risk is laughable.

NAMA was a disaster right from its inception, and they are busy throwing more and more good money after bad because they haven't got the common sense to cut *our* losses. Whatever happens they'll get a nice pension and payout for their supposed expertise - the Irish taxpayer will get lumped with the bill.


@djpbarry

This money is being spent to upgrade assets that are currently unsaleable and, therefore, useless to everyone including taxpayers. Admittedly, I've not seen the details, but on the face of it, it seems to me like a good idea. Even if it only generates a very modest return on investment, it will at least mean that derelict and/or abandoned sites will be cleaned up.

@Ardmacha

Some construction is not a bubble. Ireland presently has much less construction that you would expect and finishing off properties is a wise move.

If there was a sound economic logic or principle behind this, then it would find actual financial backers. Right now, Germany is issuing zero coupon bonds - Investors are literally paying the Germans to take their money. If there was really an objective, sound analysis that could demonstrate that there is a demand out there for these properties then investors could be found as they'd be happy to get a nice return on a sure thing.

It is very telling that *nobody* is willing to fund the completion of these projects other than the great white elephant that is NAMA, which is funding its great adventure with other peoples money: our money.

All this talk about a property bounce back, or construction having some natural level of activity etc is just that: Talk. Just like the talk about "Long Term Economic Value", the nonsense that NAMA was founded on.

@Ardmacha

NAMA has offered mortgage deals with other properties. [to fund the demand side]

Oh well, thats alright so. Because lending into both sides of a property bubble to create your own bubble is guaranteed for glorious success. :rolleyes:

I wonder how it turned out for AIB, Bank of Ireland, Permament TSB, etc, etc...and the Irish taxpayer of course.

Sand

djpbarry wrote: »

This money is being spent to upgrade assets that are currently unsaleable and, therefore, useless to everyone including taxpayers. Admittedly, I've not seen the details, but on the face of it, it seems to me like a good idea. Even if it only generates a very modest return on investment, it will at least mean that derelict and/or abandoned sites will be cleaned up.

Its being spent to upgrade assets that are not in demand, which no one values enough to buy.

That money could be spent on assets which are in demand - but that would be crazy, right?

later12

Sand wrote: »

Oh Please. This is not entrepreneurship of any sort. Its a group completely unqualified bureacrats making *incredibly* stupid bets with other peoples money.

I love how there's never any doubt in your mind about anything. I don't know anything about these properties; i haven't read the Department of Finance study that is helping to inform NAMA's decision in this case. So I'm hardly in a position to be saying whether or not the decision is a wise one.

I'm talking about a point blank refusal to believe that this project is worth undertaking without looking at the evidence, which is what the OP seems to have done.

Sand

I love how there's never any doubt in your mind about anything. I don't know anything about these properties; i haven't read the Department of Finance study that is helping to inform NAMA's decision in this case. So I'm hardly in a position to be saying whether or not the decision is a wise one.

Yeah, but banks and investors have looked at these properties and their prospects. And they have ditched them onto the first group of morons they could find: NAMA.

If there was a return to be made, investors would be looking to make it. Thats what I have no doubt about.

But investors know when to cut their losses. Groups of dumb, unqualifed eejits gambling with other peoples money will always throw more good money after bad. What I find amusing is that you say you know nothing about the prospect of these properties but youre happy to presume NAMA must know what theyre doing. It goes back to my point that the real problem with Irish policy making is that the government is never, ever, ever expected to justifiy its policies. Instead the burden of evidence is always placed on those disagreeing with the government plan.

Its the root of all the problems we find ourselves in. And will continue to find ourselves in going by the above.

later12

Sand wrote: »

If there was a return to be made, investors would be looking to make it. Thats what I have no doubt about.

Absolutely not true. Just look at the bank debt out there which is guaranteed by the Irish state, which yields way above Irish Government debt despite being of equivalent risk. I don't think that makes sense to anyone. Markets are brimming with these sorts of anomalies right now.

What I find amusing is that you say you know nothing about the prospect of these properties but youre happy to presume NAMA must know what theyre doing.

No! I don't. I have already said that I don't know whether or not this is a wise move. I have absolutely no idea. I haven't read the reports, and I don't have any information apart from what I have read in that article. Therefore, I am not in a position to know anything about anything.

What I am querying is the OP's and others' immediate opposition to the plan; but perhaps he and they have read the evidence.

you've read it, I presume?

ardmacha

Its being spent to upgrade assets that are not in demand, which no one values enough to buy.

NAMA owns these properties. That is the current situation, whether you think NAMA was a good idea or not. Whatever about green field sites, which might well be suspect, the completion of properties increases their saleability and so can be perfectly rational.

It is being spent to upgrade assets that are not in demand, which no one values enough to buy.

NAMA owns half finished properties. It finishes them and agrees to sell them to people who agree to pay for them over a 20 year period or whatever. Notwithstanding general difficulties in the economy, many people can afford to make payments on houses, I fail to see how having a agreement from such people to pay for the house is not at least as good a having a half finished site.

But never allow logic spoil a good rant.

djpbarry

Sand wrote: »

If there was a sound economic logic or principle behind this, then it would find actual financial backers.

Right. This is your basic “If something was worth doing, somebody would have done it by now. Nobody’s done it, so it’s obviously not worth doing.” If we take this to its logical conclusion, nothing is worth doing – if it was, somebody would have done it already.

Sand wrote: »

That money could be spent on assets which are in demand...

So there’s absolutely no demand for any kind of property anywhere in Ireland right now?

Sand wrote: »

Yeah, but banks and investors have looked at these properties and their prospects.

And if we’ve learned anything over the last number of years, it’s that banks and investors are always bang on.

Right?

Let’s take an example from history. Rolls Royce almost went bankrupt developing the precursor to the Trent jet engine. Had the UK government not stepped in to save the company, Trent engines would not be mounted on 40% of the world’s commercial airliners today. But by your logic, Rolls Royce was not worth saving because no private investor(s) spotted an opportunity – they were clearly wrong. I mean, they could not possibly have been more wrong.

Sand is 100% right here.

The government should not be jumping into bad investments where the private sector steers clear. If the government tackled to root causes of our problems then the government would be doing its job and the private sector would do this job.

Between the internship scheme, the banks & NAMA you`d swear we were on the route to communism

djpbarry

djpbarry wrote: »

Let’s take an example from history. Rolls Royce almost went bankrupt developing the precursor to the Trent jet engine. Had the UK government not stepped in to save the company, Trent engines would not be mounted on 40% of the world’s commercial airliners today. But by your logic, Rolls Royce was not worth saving because no private investor(s) spotted an opportunity – they were clearly wrong. I mean, they could not possibly have been more wrong.

What rubbish, the engineers, designers and manufacturers would have found work elsewhere and who knows we might have even better engines now. Nothing magical about a brand name.

djpbarry

Deleted User wrote: »

What rubbish, the engineers, designers and manufacturers would have found work elsewhere...

Not the point. The point is that investors at the time didn't recognise the potential. I'm not saying the government of the time did - it was most likely a political move to save a large employer - but I find this idea that the market is always right a touch ridiculous.

Sand

@djpbarry

Right. This is your basic “If something was worth doing, somebody would have done it by now. Nobody’s done it, so it’s obviously not worth doing.” If we take this to its logical conclusion, nothing is worth doing – if it was, somebody would have done it already.

No, its your basic " Investors wont touch it with a barge pole so that should set off really big red flashing lights all across the dashboard".

Markets are very useful for sending signals - Irish policymakers completely and totally ignored the question as to why the Irish banks couldnt raise funds in September 2008. Much as they are completely and totally ignoring the question as to why these property developers cannot make an objective case to investors to back completion of their projects today.

Bull headed stubborn refusal to acknowledge reality hasn't really worked out as a policy response for the Irish state so far.

But feck it - go nuts. Shure its only taxpayer money, its not like anyone in NAMA will lose a cent.

So there’s absolutely no demand for any kind of property anywhere in Ireland right now?

I'm sure there is, but if there was demand for the property NAMA is planning the complete then it would fund itself without NAMA intervention.

And if we’ve learned anything over the last number of years, it’s that banks and investors are always bang on.

Right?

Yep - banks and investors were fleeing out of Irish banks and the Irish property bubble long before the guarantee was required. Their departure sparked the need for the guarantee. And even the dumb Irish bankers managed to dump all their losses on some even dumber mugs - the Irish government! Even the worst banks in the world are smarter than the Irish government.

We have also learned that the governments are woefully incompetent when it comes to budgeting, measuring risk or understanding what theyre doing: out of control spending, stupid bank guarantee, NAMA, acceptance of derranged "bailout"

Let’s take an example from history. Rolls Royce almost went bankrupt developing the precursor to the Trent jet engine. Had the UK government not stepped in to save the company, Trent engines would not be mounted on 40% of the world’s commercial airliners today. But by your logic, Rolls Royce was not worth saving because no private investor(s) spotted an opportunity – they were clearly wrong. I mean, they could not possibly have been more wrong.

Dear god - when Rolls Royce went bankrupt, someone else would have bought their equipment, designs and hired their best workers. Engines would still have been mounted on planes, just at much less cost to the UK government and its people.

Bailing out of failed companies is simply robbing Peter to pay Paul. It simply rewards incompetence and strangles out any fresh competitors. Look at the Irish banks - rescued by the Irish taxpayer, but busy sucking the Irish economy dry and I laugh when people wonder why the banks arent grateful...

@Ardmacha

NAMA owns these properties. That is the current situation, whether you think NAMA was a good idea or not. Whatever about green field sites, which might well be suspect, the completion of properties increases their saleability and so can be perfectly rational.

Throwing good money after bad is never rational. Any funds invested in this crap is funds that cannot be invested to deliver infrastructure or services people actually demand.

We have a limited ability to raise funds - we ought to be thinking *really* hard before throwing it at white elephant developments because we wont get those funds back easily.

Absolutely not true. Just look at the bank debt out there which is guaranteed by the Irish state, which yields way above Irish Government debt despite being of equivalent risk. I don't think that makes sense to anyone. Markets are brimming with these sorts of anomalies right now.

Bank debt, even bank debt guaranteed by the Irish state, is not Irish government debt - despite the desperate attempts by very stupid Irish governments to equate the two. Investors recognize the difference - they know its much more likely that the Irish government will revoke its guarantees long before it will ever default on its own actual sovereign debt. That's not an anomaly - that common sense.

No! I don't. I have already said that I don't know whether or not this is a wise move. I have absolutely no idea. I haven't read the reports, and I don't have any information apart from what I have read in that article. Therefore, I am not in a position to know anything about anything.

So you've no logical reason to consider this a wise move by NAMA - but you still feel opposition to it has to be justified, not acceptance of it. This despite *nothing* about NAMA being wise.

I mean I laugh when I remember explaining why NAMA was going to be a disaster back in 2009 and I encountered the above "Ah shure, it'll be grand - you cant justifiably disagree with NAMA because you havent seen their secret plans. Trust the plan".

Now were in 2012 and disquieting news about NAMA is slipping out: Banks dead and reverted to parasites killing the host. Rental incomes 26% below target. Property prices fallen significantly below target. Increasingly desperate attempts to "get the property market going".

And still, even now people are still "Ah shure, you have to explain why you disagree with NAMA...you havent seen their secret plan. It'll be grand" whilst NAMA is rushing around throwing *their* money around with no explanation or justification...

Irish people never learn.

What I am querying is the OP's and others' immediate opposition to the plan; but perhaps he and they have read the evidence.

you've read it, I presume?

Absolutely everything about NAMA is locked up tight under state secrecy - they report only the MoF. NAMA has not released any detailed investment plan or strategy on how they're going to waste your money by investing in overpriced property and selling into a depression. You can choose to be reassured by that.

ardmacha

Sand wrote:

We have a limited ability to raise funds - we ought to be thinking *really* hard before throwing it at white elephant developments because we wont get those funds back easily.

This makes perfect sense.

Now having thought *really* hard about it, might completed properties not be more saleable (i.e. to get your funds back) than uncompleted ones?

Sand

@Ardmacha

This makes perfect sense.

Now having thought *really* hard about it, might completed properties not be more saleable (i.e. to get your funds back) than uncompleted ones?

Think a *little* harder. Maybe purpose built schools or services might offer a better investment for the Irish taxpayer than a proerty investment punt in the middle of an epic property crash and depression. Maybe.

And you're only thinking about one side of the equation. Lets say you have a house. You bought it for 120K. Its worth 100K. You want to increase its sale value.

You borrow 50K and spend it on all sorts of fancy gadgets and gizmos and gold plated taps.

The house sells for 125K.

Now have you reduced or increased the loss on your investment by increasing its sale value?

ardmacha

Sand wrote:

You borrow 50K and spend it on all sorts of fancy gadgets and gizmos and gold plated taps.

This is not finishing a property to make it habitable. There is an enormous difference between a completed habitable property and one that is not finished. Fancy gadgets are only icing, not the cake itself.

later12

Sand wrote: »

Bank debt, even bank debt guaranteed by the Irish state, is not Irish government debt - despite the desperate attempts by very stupid Irish governments to equate the two. Investors recognize the difference - they know its much more likely that the Irish government will revoke its guarantees long before it will ever default on its own actual sovereign debt. That's not an anomaly - that common sense.

Ok, not really getting into this, but the risk carried on an indenture is what matters, both in terms of holdings for the purposes of regulatory requirements and trading on the open market. Djpbarry gave you a logical refutation for your statement, and this is just an illustration of the sort of aberration that can exist arising out of a pretty extraordinary marketplace.

So you've no logical reason to consider this a wise move by NAMA - but you still feel opposition to it has to be justified, not acceptance of it.

I don't know what you're not getting about this. Have I said this should be endorsed? Absolutely not. Therefore, there is no acceptance of the value of the project on my behalf. I would be wary of anybody who immediately decides a €2bn project has merit (or not) without at least looking at the evidence that is available.

Absolutely everything about NAMA is locked up tight under state secrecy

"Absolutely everything"? Quite unfortunate that you wrote that at the same time as NAMA was publishing its Q4, 2011 Report alongside The Comptroller & Auditor General's Special Report on NAMA Loans.

The news that NAMA was about to make this €2bn investment mentioned 2 reports, one of which should be available on the Department of Finance's website (it may be 2010's National Strategic Report, if I were to hazard a guess) and the Construction Industry Council's Plan for National Recovery

Now I know there is a good deal of opacity surrounding NAMA - much of it could be done away with, but you can't quite say that everything is shrouded in mystery; at least not in this case.

NakedNNettles

2 billion seems to a lot of cash to be spending on construction especially with the way things are economically.

Bulldozers would be far cheaper.

djpbarry

Sand wrote: »

Markets are very useful for sending signals...

Sure. But they’re not perfect. You seem to believe they are.

Sand wrote: »

But feck it - go nuts. Shure its only taxpayer money...

Being spent on taxpayers’ assets. You seem to be deliberately overlooking this.

Sand wrote: »

I'm sure there is, but if there was demand for the property NAMA is planning the complete then it would fund itself without NAMA intervention.

That assumes that private funding is available from somewhere?

Sand wrote: »

Yep - banks and investors were fleeing out of Irish banks and the Irish property bubble long before the guarantee was required. Their departure sparked the need for the guarantee. And even the dumb Irish bankers managed to dump all their losses on some even dumber mugs - the Irish government! Even the worst banks in the world are smarter than the Irish government.

Ok, I’m done with this nonsense. Sand, you’ve firmly rooted yourself in the “It’s Irish, therefore it’s ****e” camp and absolutely nothing is ever going to convince you that you’re not 100% right about absolutely everything. So I’m done reading your rants. It’s boring.

Dob74

murphaph wrote: »

NAMA owns lots of foreign property (especially UK) too. London has seen prices surge as the Greeks buy up all in sight.

That's where they're making any profits.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0524/nama-faces-big-challenges-in-recovering-loans.html

I think the C and AG takes my few.
Yes there is cash follow from the sales of London property.
Profit minimal at best, our developer superhero's paid top dollar for every thing they bought.
Sterling in down v the euro so any profit from the UK would be watered down.
NAMA are just going have to admit that they are unable to make a profit due to economic conditions.

The next scandal will be the sale of there Irish assets to the usual insiders.

Mr.Micro

NakedNNettles wrote: »

2 billion seems to a lot of cash to be spending on construction especially with the way things are economically.

Bulldozers would be far cheaper.

NAMA was set up to protect the developers and grossly incompetent banks. It has all the scruples of a big developer and appears to be largely secretive in its operations. It cannot do wrong, as the taxpayer underwrites its activity, so there is no risk, as it protects the rotten developers and banks. The taxpayer will pay for a very long time and I doubt if prudence or logic will have much to do with NAMA decisions as it is not paying the bill.

djpbarry

Mr.Micro wrote: »

NAMA was set up to protect the developers and grossly incompetent banks.

No, it wasn't. NAMA was established to get "bad debts" off the books of banks so they could start lending again and get the economy moving - it was supposed to be a "bad bank". Whether it works or not is another matter, but let's please stop pretending that NAMA is a "protector" of developers in particular. The major flaw in the business plan was that it depended on a global recovery which has yet to occur.

Mr.Micro

djpbarry wrote: »

No, it wasn't. NAMA was established to get "bad debts" off the books of banks so they could start lending again and get the economy moving - it was supposed to be a "bad bank". Whether it works or not is another matter, but let's please stop pretending that NAMA is a "protector" of developers in particular. The major flaw in the business plan was that it depended on a global recovery which has yet to occur.

I am quite aware what NAMA was set up for, thank you. So taking the bad debts from the banks was not protecting them? Since a great deal of the bank debt was/is developer led, then the developers were protected along with the banks, with the public to pay big to have a banking system. So far the beneficiaries of NAMA has been the banks and developers. When the public gets its money back, then we may view NAMA differently, that may never happen or it may just give a small return.

NAMA was established to get "bad debts" off the books of banks so they could start lending again and get the economy moving -.

Would you say that has happened?

Sand

@Ardmacha

This is not finishing a property to make it habitable. There is an enormous difference between a completed habitable property and one that is not finished. Fancy gadgets are only icing, not the cake itself.

Its throwing good money after bad. Spending money to make a property that no one wants finished and habitable just leaves you with a property that is finished and habitable that. nobody. wants.

You're blindly assuming that anything NAMA spends on finishing or improving these properties to increase their sale value will reduce losses - I've explained how spending to increase sale value can (and will) actually increase the losses. Acknowledge that or ignore it as it pleases you.

@Later12

Ok, not really getting into this, but the risk carried on an indenture is what matters, both in terms of holdings for the purposes of regulatory requirements and trading on the open market

That's an interesting perspective. I'll stack it up there with your judgement of Anglo Irish as being a well run bank, and Morgan Kelly as being alarmist when he predicted a major problem with the Irish banks mortgage books.

Djpbarry gave you a logical refutation for your statement

I didn't notice it if he did - I'm pretty sure it would have stood out as his posts have declined to basically denouncing me for not pulling on the green jersey.

I don't know what you're not getting about this.

Yep, the shame is I know what you're not getting about it.

Now I know there is a good deal of opacity surrounding NAMA - much of it could be done away with, but you can't quite say that everything is shrouded in mystery; at least not in this case.

So you're disagreeing with my statement, whilst admitting its true for all intents and purposes - specifically this case where the logical underpinning for the plan has not been released. Well, I'm glad we agree? Or is it disagree?

@djpbarry

Sure. But they’re not perfect. You seem to believe they are.

I absolutely don't.

Whats better? Evidence based policy or policy based evidence? Markets are right now sending evidence that they have zero confidence in these projects. This is entirely reasonable: Ireland is in a depression. Unemployment is rampant. Growth prospects are dim. Credit is non-existent. There are desperate attempts to prevent properties from clearing at market prices. The conditions for any sort of takeoff in property are absent. All of this is evidence.

Choosing this as a time to go double or nothing on the madness of NAMA is not a brave, plucky move. Its dumb. Really dumb. Remember when Brendan O'Connor told us back in 2007 that the really smart and ballsy people were buying property? He at least had the excuse of complete ignorance.

Being spent on taxpayers’ assets. You seem to be deliberately overlooking this.

See above.

Taxpayers assets? NAMA was *supposedly* founded to rationalise the banks losses on their crazed property investments at minimal cost to the Irish taxpayer. This morphing into a pseudo profit seeking vulture fund is *exactly* what was warned about when NAMA was being set up. The state was supposed to come in and objectively and dispassionately resolve the issue of losses without getting captured by the banks myopia on the quality of their loan books. Instead it NAMA has lost objectivity and is itself blind to the quality of its so called investments...

Gamekeeper has turned poacher.

That assumes that private funding is available from somewhere?

Banks are awash with free money from the ECB. Investors are literally paying the German government to take their money via zero coupon bonds. I kid you not. The globe is awash with funds seeking to find a safe harbour, a nice steady return.

If there was an *objective* case for a decent return on investing in Irish property, why cant NAMA make it?

Rhetorical question: Its because there isn't any objective case for any return on investing in Irish property.

Ok, I’m done with this nonsense. Sand, you’ve firmly rooted yourself in the “It’s Irish, therefore it’s ****e” camp and absolutely nothing is ever going to convince you that you’re not 100% right about absolutely everything. So I’m done reading your rants. It’s boring.

Ah an appeal to patriotism. I believe Samuel Johnson had something to say on that matter.

I find it awe inspiring that the Green Jersey brigade have consistently driven Ireland into the ground and surrendered our sovereignty yet they still presume that their interests and Ireland's interests perfectly align, so people who disagree with their views are somehow traitors.

Its fine if you don't read my posts - saves me the time dealing with the reply. I still retain the right to read yours and correct you when you're saying something ridiculous however.

The major flaw in the business plan was that it depended on a global recovery which has yet to occur.

"Ah shure, no one could have seen that coming..."

Right?

K-9

Mr.Micro wrote: »

So far the beneficiaries of NAMA has been the banks and developers.

There's a fair few developers who'd argue otherwise!

MysticalRain

K-9 wrote: »

There's a fair few developers who'd argue otherwise!

That's ingratitude for you. Developers bitch and moan while we taxpayers pay them a salary of 80-100k, and our government tries to create another property bubble they can make a killing on. They would be a hell of a lot worse off if the government hadn't intervened.

I expect right-wing and libertarian folks will be citing NAMA for years to come as a classic example of why government interference in markets is a really bad thing. With this particular instance, it is hard to disagree with them.

When the government finds itself in a hole it has created for itself, it needs to stop digging.

K-9

MysticalRain wrote: »

That's ingratitude for you. Developers bitch and moan while we taxpayers pay them a salary of 80-100k, and our government tries to create another property bubble they can make a killing on. They would be a hell of a lot worse off if the government hadn't intervened.

Well the developers I was thinking about aren't getting 80-100k, they are bust, brought about by NAMA action.

I expect right-wing and libertarian folks will be citing NAMA for years to come as a classic example of why government interference in markets is a really bad thing. With this particular instance, it is hard to disagree with them.

When the government finds itself in a hole it has created for itself, it needs to stop digging.

Oh some will be opposed to NAMA by purely ideological grounds, we agree on that, even if NAMA turned in a profit that would be irrelevant for some. If this was the private sector, volte-face.

later12

Sand wrote: »

So you're disagreeing with my statement, whilst admitting its true for all intents and purposes - specifically this case where the logical underpinning for the plan has not been released. Well, I'm glad we agree? Or is it disagree?

The logical underpinning of the plan has been released in part - what has not been released is any CBA. But if you had at least read the two reports linked to and then formed your conclusions or criticisms, I think that would be more worthwhile than simply repeating these automated mantras about NAMA and the construction industry.

Icepick

K-9 wrote: »

they are bust, brought about by NAMA action.

Who?

K-9

Icepick wrote: »

Who?

The developers I was thinking about, it's in the part of the quote you left out.

Mr.Micro

K-9 wrote: »

Well the developers I was thinking about aren't getting 80-100k, they are bust, brought about by NAMA action.

So you perhaps think that NAMA should have taken all developers under its wing? The ordinary man and woman in the street has to weather the fiscal austerity and debts on their own. For those developers who were not big enough to be included in the NAMA club, then its hard cheese for them, and they perhaps expecting equity, or better still get a salary of up to 200k per year for co-operating with NAMA.....you could not make it up.

Icepick

K-9 wrote: »

The developers I was thinking about, it's in the part of the quote you left out.

names and other details?