What is your view on the property market currently?

Route1

House prices spiralling out of control, particularly in Dublin. A shortage of rental accommodation sees rents at and all time high?
What do you see as the solution?

Tayschren

Route1 wrote: »

House prices spiralling out of control, particularly in Dublin. A shortage of rental accommodation sees rents at and all time high?
What do you see as the solution?

Get a job

pummice

Read recently that New Zealand were going to bring in a ban on foreigners buying property in New Zealand. Maybe we should try that here, for a start Vulture Funds wouldnt be able to buy property here.

Ipso

Why are vulture funds the problem?

Allinall

Route1 wrote: »

House prices spiralling out of control, particularly in Dublin. A shortage of rental accommodation sees rents at and all time high?
What do you see as the solution?

Supply and demand.

We can't reduce demand, so we need to increase supply.

How do we increase supply?
I've no idea.

Be grand

Ubbquittious

Tis tigering. Going to pack up my job and get €2,000 a week for stacking the odd cavity block

emo72

Ipso wrote: »

Why are vulture funds the problem?

They are part of the problem. Not the only one. Portfolios of hundreds of houses bundled together that only billionaires could afford to buy. That's stitched up.

server down

Tayschren wrote: »

Get a job

That’s an interesting solution. You are saying the solution to the property crisis is the op getting a job, even though he probably has a job?

Very well thought out argument.

_Kaiser_

FG have led us into yet another property crisis... this one arguably worse as there's not only no supply, but even rental prices are rising so fast that many have no hope of ever buying or even being able to rent something for a reasonable rate. It's at the point now where rental markets an hour's drive away from Dublin are affected - I say that as someone who has been priced out of Dublin to one of those towns.

There's no let up in sight either, and it's starting to impact the country's competitiveness:

The news comes as the American Chamber of Commerce in Ireland, which represents big US employers here, warned that lack of housing risked making the country less attractive for investment.
AmCham members are the backbone of Ireland's foreign direct investment (FDI) sector and employ 150,000 staff here.

Yesterday, IDA chief executive Martin Shanahan downplayed the immediate risk to investment danger, but admitted that the housing crisis is now being raised by potential investors when they look at Ireland.

Meanwhile huge amounts of property have been sold off to foreign investment funds, and private landlords (most of whom are actually decent - as are most tenants) are being forced out through high costs/taxes and restrictive legislation which is reducing supply even further.

hatrickpatrick

Controversial opinion, but I personally think we need to do away with the idea of a dwelling as an "asset" altogether, and ban people from trading them as such. In other words, if you're not buying a house or apartment to live in it or rent it out to someone, if you're buying it purely for the purposes of gambling on its value, you shouldn't be allowed to do that. The concept of a house needs to transcend market economics because it's simply too important to society for it to be left in the power of those whose first and foremost interest is not the wellbeing of society.

I'd apply this to a great many things, not just housing TBH. Certain sectors, property being an example of one, should be regarded as having an obligation to put society before profit, and be regarded essentially as having an element of "service" about them.

I'm not applying this to construction or property development, by the way. I'm applying it to people who buy large swathes of properties with the explicit hope that they can subsequently sell them on at a higher price. In my view, homes should be excluded from being regarded as market assets in this manner, they're simply too fundamental to the functioning of civilised society to be allowed to be manipulated in this manner.

maxwell smart

Set up a non profit house building company who can fast track planning applications, Give them access to the NAMA land bank at the price Nama paid for the land.
Get them set up off the national balance sheet so they can borrow on the international money markets without impacting our national debt position.
Use this money to start a massive programme of house building which would create a large number of jobs for quite a lot of the people who couldn't reskill after the last crash.
The properties built would be mixed, some apartments (for families), some semi-detached, some terraced.
Then 2 models (both based on the low cost of the borrowed money)
1. Low cost purchase - Slight mark up on the cost of the borrowed money on a 20 year mortgage basis with no option to sell the property until the total cost is paid off.
2. Rental model - fixed 5 year rental for those who don't want to commit to buying. This will equalise the rental market.

Something like the above, it's probably full of holes as I just thought of it, but something along those lines

Atoms for Peace

Ipso wrote: »

Why are vulture funds the problem?

Is that you Micheal?

Ipso

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

Is that you Micheal?

No, just someone who thinks that the property market is being kept high so people who bought at the peak aren't stung by having to sell and make a loss and so that the banks don't have to write down any losses. But going by your simplistic response you probably can't grasp that.
Also you can't have a property market where there are no repossessions and low interest rates.

Ipso

maxwell smart wrote: »

Set up a non profit house building company who can fast track planning applications, Give them access to the NAMA land bank at the price Nama paid for the land.
Get them set up off the national balance sheet so they can borrow on the international money markets without impacting our national debt position.
Use this money to start a massive programme of house building which would create a large number of jobs for quite a lot of the people who couldn't reskill after the last crash.
The properties built would be mixed, some apartments (for families), some semi-detached, some terraced.
Then 2 models (both based on the low cost of the borrowed money)
1. Low cost purchase - Slight mark up on the cost of the borrowed money on a 20 year mortgage basis with no option to sell the property until the total cost is paid off.
2. Rental model - fixed 5 year rental for those who don't want to commit to buying. This will equalise the rental market.

Something like the above, it's probably full of holes as I just thought of it, but something along those lines

How exactly?

ShowMeTheCash

So I was listening to a dude on about this on the Claire Byrne show a few weeks back. Something to do with the property pricing in Galway City jumping a few % points.

What was mentioned was "foreign investment" or people that have moved away buying houses back in Ireland and renting them out.

So this is where the wheels start to come off again.

Any economy needs to be balanced, their should be a direct correlation between wages in an area and the cost of buying homes in that area. Foreign investment in homes is literally an act of lunacy, homes being treated as an investment in a domestic sense was idiotic enough but as a foreign investment? It's literally nuts!

In terms of taxation and bank bailouts we are still paying, I do not know the figures for the last 2 years but I think 37% of Ireland GDP in 2015 was paying back bank loans.

Foreign investment in this sense is not putting money back into the country it is literally siphoning.

We cannot afford another bubble!

thee glitz

emo72 wrote: »

They are part of the problem. Not the only one. Portfolios of hundreds of houses bundled together that only billionaires could afford to buy. That's stitched up.

It would have been something if they'd paid a fair price for them. Mick Wallace has a video circulating of him questioning these deals in the Dáil.

ShowMeTheCash

Ipso wrote: »

No, just someone who thinks that the property market is being kept high so people who bought at the peak aren't stung by having to sell and make a loss and so that the banks don't have to write down any losses. But going by your simplistic response you probably can't grasp that.
Also you can't have a property market where there are no repossessions and low interest rates.

The housing market adjusted in many places, places like Dublin probably less so, but like any large city where there is work it is easier for people to pay their over inflated mortgages. The interest rate is low as a lot of people would not be able to afford their mortgages if it was to move.

Banks are being patient, it is better to have people struggle on the tipping point but not default some repayment is better than no-repayment.

Banks would love the idea of foreign investment as they get an injection of cash from outside sources, what we might see is interest rates move up if foreign investment proves successful for the banks.

This may even help people who bought beyond their means in that it will create another bubble so they then can sell the house they really cannot afford for the price they bought it at, but ultimately it will push Irish people out of the market or we go back to a situation where banks are lending people money on loans they really cannot afford.

So when that bubble bursts and even more of our GDP is being pushed into paying that off and nearly no money is being reinvested in the country you need not wonder why our schools have when to sh1t, people need to travel the length of the country to see a specialist, young people are leaving in droves on the first flight out, car insurance is being hiked up and whatever new taxes are being invented to pay back the loans!

bear1

I want to move back to Ireland but the situation with property scares the hell out of me.
I own a property in Warsaw and if I sold it now id make approx 40k after paying off the mortgage.
I think in Ireland that would barely be enough to get me a deposit.
Such a pity.

Ipso

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

The housing market adjusted in many places, places like Dublin probably less so, but like any large city where there is work it is easier for people to pay their over inflated mortgages. The interest rate is low as a lot of people would not be able to afford their mortgages if it was to move.

Banks are being patient, it is better to have people struggle on the tipping point but not default some repayment is better than no-repayment.

Banks would love the idea of foreign investment as they get an injection of cash from outside sources, what we might see is interest rates move up if foreign investment proves successful for the banks.

This may even help people who bought beyond their means in that it will create another bubble so they then can sell the house they really cannot afford for the price they bought it at, but ultimately it will push Irish people out of the market or we go back to a situation where banks are lending people money on loans they really cannot afford.

So when that bubble bursts and even more of our GDP is being pushed into paying that off and nearly no money is being reinvested in the country you need not wonder why our schools have when to sh1t, people need to travel the length of the country to see a specialist, young people are leaving in droves on the first flight out, car insurance is being hiked up and whatever new taxes are being invented to pay back the loans!

I don't disagree, I just don't buy the whole poor Irish people getting screwed over by yet another outside entity.
During the first credit bubble there were people who actually believed Ireland was the richest country in the world, people who spoke up about future problems were told to commit suicide by the glorious leader, the party that led the way tot eh first bubble and bankrupted the country were re-elected, the minister mainly responsible for bailing out Anglo was re-elected, someone from the party who bankrupted the country was in serious contention for the presidency, the party who bankrupted the country could be re-elected the next time around and then you have the emergence of the far left groups who thinks there is unlimited money to throw around and who don't know the difference between austerity and bankruptcy.

McMurphy

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Controversial opinion, but I personally think we need to do away with the idea of a dwelling as an "asset" altogether, and ban people from trading them as such. In other words, if you're not buying a house or apartment to live in it or rent it out to someone, if you're buying it purely for the purposes of gambling on its value, you shouldn't be allowed to do that. The concept of a house needs to transcend market economics because it's simply too important to society for it to be left in the power of those whose first and foremost interest is not the wellbeing of society.

I'd apply this to a great many things, not just housing TBH. Certain sectors, property being an example of one, should be regarded as having an obligation to put society before profit, and be regarded essentially as having an element of "service" about them.

I'm not applying this to construction or property development, by the way. I'm applying it to people who buy large swathes of properties with the explicit hope that they can subsequently sell them on at a higher price. In my view, homes should be excluded from being regarded as market assets in this manner, they're simply too fundamental to the functioning of civilised society to be allowed to be manipulated in this manner.

With the number of ministers and or TDs we have that are landlords, good luck ever seeing such common sense policies being introduced here.

I was listening to the NZ policies of restricting property to kiwis the other day with interest.

Seems sensible enough idea to me, but with the present and last govt ransacking grannys knicker drawer for assets to sell off to foreign vulture funds, good luck with that ever being introduced also.

maxwell smart

maxwell smart wrote: »

Set up a non profit house building company who can fast track planning applications, Give them access to the NAMA land bank at the price Nama paid for the land.
Get them set up off the national balance sheet so they can borrow on the international money markets without impacting our national debt position.
Use this money to start a massive programme of house building which would create a large number of jobs for quite a lot of the people who couldn't reskill after the last crash.
The properties built would be mixed, some apartments (for families), some semi-detached, some terraced.
Then 2 models (both based on the low cost of the borrowed money)
1. Low cost purchase - Slight mark up on the cost of the borrowed money on a 20 year mortgage basis with no option to sell the property until the total cost is paid off.
2. Rental model - fixed 5 year rental for those who don't want to commit to buying. This will equalise the rental market.

Something like the above, it's probably full of holes as I just thought of it, but something along those lines

Ipso wrote: »

How exactly?

My understanding is that if the Government can prove to Eurostat that it is a commercial undertaking that doesn't need public funding then it can borrow off book as it's not the Government borrowing (as it were - even though it sort of is) It's just an accounting measure

Ipso

Would you lend the Irish government money for a property venture?

maxwell smart

Ipso wrote: »

Would you lend the Irish government money for a property venture?

I know what you mean but I think they would get the money as it's really going into property, and at the rate of return available at the moment there are plenty of sovereign wealth funds ready to give long term loans at a fixed rate.

Personally I wouldn't give the government a euro as they would quickly turn it into 10cent!

I really don't understand why there's such a chronic shortage. Are there significantly more people living in Ireland now than there were in 2008? The cynic in me thinks that some property is deliberately being left to sit in order to keep prices high.

Back in 2010 I rented a two bed apartment alone in Fairview for €650 a month. I'm now living in a 4-way house share in Swords for €550. It's terrible.

Ipso

maxwell smart wrote: »

I know what you mean but I think they would get the money as it's really going into property, and at the rate of return available at the moment there are plenty of sovereign wealth funds ready to give long term loans at a fixed rate.

Personally I wouldn't give the government a euro as they would quickly turn it into 10cent!

Why sovereign wealth funds and not vulture funds though? Not having a go at you but I think people want to see bogey man and vulture funds are it.

There was an article recently in either the indo or times where the writer went to a court hearing involving a house owner and a vulture fund who bough the loan and she said the vulture fund were happy enough as long as the mortgage owner were wiling to co-operate.
I guarantee there were people who bought investment properties during the bubble who stopped making payments and hoped loans would be wrote off and I'm certain there are others who want debt forgiveness while wanting to keep the house.

ShowMeTheCash

Ipso wrote: »

I don't disagree, I just don't buy the whole poor Irish people getting screwed over by yet another outside entity.
During the first credit bubble there were people who actually believed Ireland was the richest country in the world, people who spoke up about future problems were told to commit suicide by the glorious leader, the party that led the way tot eh first bubble and bankrupted the country were re-elected, the minister mainly responsible for bailing out Anglo was re-elected, someone from the party who bankrupted the country was in serious contention for the presidency, the party who bankrupted the country could be re-elected the next time around and then you have the emergence of the far left groups who thinks there is unlimited money to throw around and who don't know the difference between austerity and bankruptcy.

Not sure if there is a point here.....
Who was the last outside entity?

Foreign investment is on the rise, again this was something talked about on RTE a few weeks ago, not sure you are denying foreign investment is on the rise or you don't see it as an issue?

thomasm

Ernest and Young are now giving new employees interest free loans (wage advance) to rent accomadation as the cost is a deterrent to them getting staff. That's does not bode well for other companies looking at setting up here

Ulysses Gaze

Route1 wrote: »

House prices spiralling out of control, particularly in Dublin. A shortage of rental accommodation sees rents at and all time high?
What do you see as the solution?

This is all idealistic and will never, ever, ever, ever happen......

1. Start by implementing mandatory 3/5 year tenancy agreements between Private Landlords and their Tenants. No rent rises during that time but if the tenant leaves before the time is up, the landlord keeps the deposit and can then increase the rent by 2%.

2. Ban any TD from owning more than 2 properties for the time that they are in the Dail. This includes their immediate families and would also cover any last minute transfers of assets into their wives/cousins/childrens/dogs names. It would also ban them setting up a company or companies and transfering the management of the property(ies) to the company and its agents.

Too many sitting TDs (and former ones) have vested interests in property (ahem Frank "Forty Gaffs" Fahy) and should be concentrated on running the country rather than profiteering. They get paid well enough, have big enough expenses and gold plated pensions when they retire that they can then invest in all the property they want once out the Dail AND/or Seanad door.

3. Ban gratuitous advertising of properties in newspapers.

4. Ban Banks ads for properties that are again gratuitous.

5. Cap the price of development land and enforce strict regulations of how much time a land speculator can hold on to the land before developing it. And having a few dozen horses grazing on the land will not count as fair usage anymore.

6. Enforce proper building code regulations for developments. If the building codes on soundproofing etc are not adhered to, the developer and builder can either a) Fix them at their cost or b) Prepare to be sued (Fast-Track style of course).

7. A mandatory 10 year personal liability on any developer and/or builder who builds a residential development. So if there are problems with the development? **** you, fix them. Oh you ran out of money? **** you, fix them. As we saw from the Liam Carroll case, these guys set up specific companies to build these developments that are akin to a Spider's Web to escape liability. Under this law, that would end. And we will take the family home if you try and get away with it.

8. Educate the Irish public that 95% of you won't get rich by buying BTL properties.....

ShowMeTheCash

Karsini wrote: »

I really don't understand why there's such a chronic shortage. Are there significantly more people living in Ireland now than there were in 2008? The cynic in me thinks that some property is deliberately being left to sit in order to keep prices high.

Back in 2010 I rented a two bed apartment alone in Fairview for €650 a month. I'm now living in a 4-way house share in Swords for €550. It's terrible.

Main issue is there is no affordable housing schemes like "Council houses" anymore. Everything is now housing assistance so the whole rental market do a degree has been privatised. What has also been talked about is homelessness in Ireland is on the rise!

Ipso

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Not sure if there is a point here.....
Who was the last outside entity?

Foreign investment is on the rise, again this was something talked about on RTE a few weeks ago, not sure you are denying foreign investment is on the rise or you don't see it as an issue?

Vulture funds seem to be a favourite to blame for the property bubble now, my point is that a lot of people were happy with high house prices from 2003 onwards and voted that way.

Edward M

Karsini wrote: »

I really don't understand why there's such a chronic shortage. Are there significantly more people living in Ireland now than there were in 2008? The cynic in me thinks that some property is deliberately being left to sit in order to keep prices high.

Back in 2010 I rented a two bed apartment alone in Fairview for €650 a month. I'm now living in a 4-way house share in Swords for €550. It's terrible.

2010, a lifetime ago and certainly a recession ago, you can't compare really.

zweton

thomasm wrote: »

Ernest and Young are now giving new employees interest free loans (wage advance) to rent accomadation as the cost is a deterrent to them getting staff. That's does not bode well for other companies looking at setting up here

maybe it could benefit other countys.

Edward M

Edward M wrote: »

2010, a lifetime ago and certainly a recession ago, you can't compare really.

While that may be the case, should the same place be worth double that (or more) now? I really don't think so.

LirW

Edward M wrote: »

2010, a lifetime ago and certainly a recession ago, you can't compare really.

Still pretty depressing that singles on an average wage can't afford the luxury of renting their own place nevermind buying.
I know a guy in his late 50s who has to move out of his own place because it'll be sold, yet he can't afford living on his own, no landlord wants him as a mature single and no houseshare considers him.
Yet he earns too much for social housing which he wouldn't get anyway in his lifetime.

tastyt

A huge problem for supply at the minute is movers. A friend of mine is a mortgage advisor and told me a large percentage of movers are opting to hold onto their original properties and rent them out when they move to a new home.

The banks are letting them do this as they can charge stupid rent that more than covers their mortgages on the original property, thus taking more houses out of the market for the likes of first time buyers and taking advantage of the fact that more of these househunters will have to stay renting.

Its a vicious circle

ShowMeTheCash

Ipso wrote: »

Vulture funds seem to be a favourite to blame for the property bubble now, my point is that a lot of people were happy with high house prices from 2003 onwards and voted that way.

Ever hear this phrase:

Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

You are being ridiculous, no one was "happy" with high house prices! The housing market was getting out of control but the prices kept going up and up. It actually made more sense to buy a house with 0% deposit because house prices where moving at a rate that by the time you saved your 10% the housing market could of jumped 15%.

Anyone who bought a house in 2003 - 2007 probably paid way over the odds.

lazybones32

Ipso wrote: »

Vulture funds seem to be a favourite to blame for the property bubble now, my point is that a lot of people were happy with high house prices from 2003 onwards and voted that way.

And what were the opposition parties doing while FF were destroying the State? Sitting in the back seat, delighted to be on the journey.
I voted FG in the snap election (and i never willagain) but as soon as they got into power, they did what they weeks previously chastised FF for proposing to do. Not trying to redirect the thread but the majority of the public representatives failed us...and we still vote for them! This wasn't a failure of one party only.

maxwell smart

Ipso wrote: »

Why sovereign wealth funds and not vulture funds though? Not having a go at you but I think people want to see bogey man and vulture funds are it.

There was an article recently in either the indo or times where the writer went to a court hearing involving a house owner and a vulture fund who bough the loan and she said the vulture fund were happy enough as long as the mortgage owner were wiling to co-operate.
I guarantee there were people who bought investment properties during the bubble who stopped making payments and hoped loans would be wrote off and I'm certain there are others who want debt forgiveness while wanting to keep the house.

Listen I'm happy for any investment in my made up scheme. Vulture funds are just a catchy name for people who buy low and sell high and a great way for the hard left to blame someone for all the troubles in the world while they don't come up with a solution

Edward M

Karsini wrote: »

While that may be the case, should the same place be worth double that (or more) now? I really don't think so.

No, you're right of course. But the demand is higher now than 2010 in Dublin. I live in Cavan myself, work locally, but most of my friends work in Dublin, some commute, some stay up there, house shares and shared apartments. I could be getting more money if I worked in Dublin and surrounds, but I think the extra would be eaten up either way.
All I'm saying is that my locality is not unique in being in that situation, the accommodation is being eaten up in Dublin not by residents alone, but by the weekly workers travelling there.
Demand is much higher now than 2010, that's fuelling the prices.

Ulysses Gaze

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Ever hear this phrase:

Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

You are being ridiculous, no one was "happy" with high house prices! The housing market was getting out of control but the prices kept going up and up. It actually made more sense to buy a house with 0% deposit because house prices where moving at a rate that by the time you saved your 10% the housing market could of jumped 15%.

Anyone who bought a house in 2003 - 2007 probably paid way over the odds.

You are wrong there.

The Jagger Generation (as David McWilliams dubbed them) were very happy about rising House Prices. The majority owned their houses outright and could leverage the house value increases to dip in and use their houses as ATMs. And apart from cars and holidays, what was the main thing they bought?

B.T.L.s and Holiday Homes. Here and abroad.

ShowMeTheCash

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

You are wrong there.

The Jagger Generation (as David McWilliams dubbed them) were very happy about rising House Prices. The majority owned their houses outright and could leverage the house value increases to dip in and use their houses as ATMs. And apart from cars and holidays, what was the main thing they bought?

B.T.L.s and Holiday Homes. Here and abroad.

I do not think anyone was happy about this. I think it just fueled a fear that people "had" to get onto the merry go round. Once on your house price would only go up.

But regardless it was really a false economy, was not real! Anyone that was "happy" was a fool!

Jawgap

emo72 wrote: »

They are part of the problem. Not the only one. Portfolios of hundreds of houses bundled together that only billionaires could afford to buy. That's stitched up.

Except vulture funds are incentivised to get people into houses.....so how are they part of the problem?

My young lad's gf will be going to uni in Dublin later in the year and her Dad has just bought an apartment for her to use, but he's keeping it vacant for the next 8 months or so as he doesn't want "the hassle of tenants" until after his daughter has finished with it.

ShowMeTheCash

Jawgap wrote: »

Except vulture funds are incentivised to get people into houses.....so how are they part of the problem?

My young lad's gf will be going to uni in Dublin later in the year and her Dad has just bought an apartment for her to use, but he's keeping it vacant for the next 8 months or so as he doesn't want "the hassle of tenants" until after his daughter has finished with it.

It creates another "false" economy, it pushes rent up. I am sure homeless people really do not want "the hassle of sleeping rough" either.

McMurphy

Ipso wrote: »

I don't disagree, I just don't buy the whole poor Irish people getting screwed over by yet another outside entity.
During the first credit bubble there were people who actually believed Ireland was the richest country in the world, people who spoke up about future problems were told to commit suicide by the glorious leader, the party that led the way tot eh first bubble and bankrupted the country were re-elected, the minister mainly responsible for bailing out Anglo was re-elected, someone from the party who bankrupted the country was in serious contention for the presidency, the party who bankrupted the country could be re-elected the next time around and then you have the emergence of the far left groups who thinks there is unlimited money to throw around and who don't know the difference between austerity and bankruptcy.

Tweedle Dee was at the helm, but Tweedle Dum was constantly criticising them that they weren't spending more, giving more tax breaks, and basically getting us into deeper shyt.

Two cheeks of the same arse.

BillyBobBS

FG have lead us here. They are as bad if not worse than FF.

Ulysses Gaze

BillyBobBS wrote: »

FG have lead us here. They are as bad if not worse than FF.

I would respectfully disagree with you here.
No-one could be worse than FF. No-one.

They were given the economic keys to the Kingdom and really ****ed it all up.

Atoms for Peace

Property is theft!:pac:

stateofflux

as crazy as the market is, if you have the money its probably better off buying now as its only going to get worse before it gets better.

Ipso

stateofflux wrote: »

as crazy as the market is, if you have the money its probably better off buying now as its only going to get worse before it gets better.

Isn't that what Brendan O'Connor said in his smart and ballsy article. If you google it you'll see it was a smart and ballsy article.

Ulysses Gaze

Ipso wrote: »

Isn't that what Brendan O'Connor said in his smart and ballsy article. If you google it you'll see it was a smart and ballsy article.

The Oracle of Bishopstown

Has never been wrong.

Ever.

Ever.