Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Vacant Properties in Ireland

Options
1…457910…15

Comments

  • Options
    #182
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Marius34 wrote: »
    ...

    Your point being?


  • Options
    #183
    Marius34
    Registered Users Posts: 1,173 ✭✭✭Marius34


    schmittel wrote: »
    Your point being?
    Marius34 wrote: »
    Not really, you haven't told at all, how this 1.3% vacancy in Dublin Co. still tells we have high housing stocks?
    You was mainly looking at some differences.

    We agree that there are supply shortage.

    Currently Dublin Co. already are building the amount of all vacant homes in a single year. Was it sufficient? no?
    How this will solve if we add couple of thousand vacant homes, and it's realistically impossible to go to 0% vacancy rate.

    You keep telling that GeoDirectory tells the same, but when I ask, you keep moving to your Census.


  • Options
    #184
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Marius34 wrote: »
    You keep telling that GeoDirectory tells the same, but when I ask, you keep moving to your Census.

    Eh, when did I move back to my Census?!


  • Options
    #185
    Timing belt
    Registered Users Posts: 3,427 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    schmittel wrote: »
    Fair enough, of course everyone entitled to different opinions.

    I just think it is bit odd, given that you held that opinion based on thinking the vacancies were less than 3%, and considering there might actually be double the number of vacant properties you hold exactly the same opinion.

    If it was 10% that would be one in ten houses vacant. I only have to walk around to see that this is not the case.

    6% is one in every 17 houses in Dublin yet again I don't see it when I walk down the road.

    1.3% which is one in every 76 properties would seem more reasonable.


  • Options
    #186
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Timing belt wrote: »
    If it was 10% that would be one in ten houses vacant. I only have to walk around to see that this is not the case.

    6% is one in every 17 houses in Dublin yet again I don't see it when I walk down the road.

    1.3% which is one in every 76 properties would seem more reasonable.

    Ok, so you're saying you don't believe my figure of 6%, that's fair enough!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #187
    TheW1zard
    Registered Users Posts: 1,338 ✭✭✭TheW1zard


    What are they doing with all the empty industrial schools? Can they not build or sell them incase theres a huge case against the state?
    I was watching the programme on rte a few weeks back and there are a lot sitting dorment now


  • Options
    #188
    Marius34
    Registered Users Posts: 1,173 ✭✭✭Marius34


    schmittel wrote: »
    Eh, when did I move back to my Census?!

    Because it seems like you avoid my question, and don't mention GeoDirectory, possibly returning to Census.
    Sorry, I might be wrong, I'm getting lost, with the last few messages on what you trying to say..


  • Options
    #189
    Timing belt
    Registered Users Posts: 3,427 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    schmittel wrote: »
    Ok, so you're saying you don't believe my figure of 6%, that's fair enough!

    No I am not saying that I don't believe your figures what I am saying is forget about the census the GeoDirectory etc and ask your self does one in every 17 properties in Dublin seem a like the vacancy rate that you see when out and about in Dublin.


  • Options
    #190
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Marius34 wrote: »
    Because it seems like you avoid my question, and don't mention GeoDirectory, possibly returning to Census.
    Sorry, I might be wrong, I'm getting lost, with the last few messages on what you trying to say..

    It seems like I avoid your question, and now it seems like I'm possibly returning to census?!

    Spinning something maybe, playing words, or misrepresenting facts? Or any of these other crimes you like to suggest?

    Or maybe I was just slowly trying to spell out to you exactly how I arrived at my conclusions from reading GeoDirectory, step by step.

    I was trying to spell it out so you don't get lost. Earlier in the thread I have already explained it but it seems to have gone completely over your head.

    But you're so afraid that I am trying to trip you up or catch you out, you are not willing to listen!

    Sorry, I might be wrong, but that's how it seems to me.


  • Options
    #191
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Timing belt wrote: »
    No I am not saying that I don't believe your figures what I am saying is forget about the census the GeoDirectory etc and ask your self does one in every 17 properties in Dublin seem a like the vacancy rate that you see when out and about in Dublin.

    Fair enough, I have no idea, I haven't spent much time in Dublin, but I'll agree it seems unlikely.

    I guess it seems unlikely, not because I've had the opportunity of peering in windows or whatever, but because of the relentless bad news stories about the housing situation in Dublin.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #192
    Timing belt
    Registered Users Posts: 3,427 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    schmittel wrote: »
    Fair enough, I have no idea, I haven't spent much time in Dublin, but I'll agree it seems unlikely.

    I guess it seems unlikely, not because I've had the opportunity of peering in windows or whatever, but because of the relentless bad news stories about the housing situation in Dublin.

    No doubt there will be a good sound explanation as to why the figures appear higher but it doesn’t tally with what you see out and about.


  • Options
    #193
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Timing belt wrote: »
    No doubt there will be a good sound explanation as to why the figures appear higher but it doesn’t tally with what you see out and about.

    That's a fair point, and part of my gripe is that if that is the case in the middle of a housing crisis I'd like the govt to investigate and inform us what that sound explanation is.

    But what they're saying is "Nothing to see here, we need to talk about building more."


  • Options
    #194
    Marius34
    Registered Users Posts: 1,173 ✭✭✭Marius34


    schmittel wrote: »
    It seems like I avoid your question, and now it seems like I'm possibly returning to census?!

    Spinning something maybe, playing words, or misrepresenting facts? Or any of these other crimes you like to suggest?

    Or maybe I was just slowly trying to spell out to you exactly how I arrived at my conclusions from reading GeoDirectory, step by step.

    I was trying to spell it out so you don't get lost. Earlier in the thread I have already explained it but it seems to have gone completely over your head.

    But you're so afraid that I am trying to trip you up or catch you out, you are not willing to listen!

    Sorry, I might be wrong, but that's how it seems to me.

    What a drama to a question.


  • Options
    #195
    Timing belt
    Registered Users Posts: 3,427 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    schmittel wrote: »
    That's a fair point, and part of my gripe is that if that is the case in the middle of a housing crisis I'd like the govt to investigate and inform us what that sound explanation is.

    But what they're saying is "Nothing to see here, we need to talk about building more."

    Write to the cso and get them to explain.

    Government are right to concentrate on building more rather than investigate


  • Options
    #196
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Marius34 wrote: »
    What a drama to a simple question.

    Simple question:
    Marius34 wrote: »
    And how GeoDirectory tells that there are no housing stock shortage in Dublin Co.?

    Simple answer


  • Options
    #197
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Timing belt wrote: »
    Write to the cso and get them to explain.

    Government are right to concentrate on building more rather than investigate

    The CSO have already given their explanation. The short version is "We know what we're doing, we stand over our findings."


  • Options
    #198
    Timing belt
    Registered Users Posts: 3,427 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    schmittel wrote: »
    The CSO have already given their explanation. The short version is "We know what we're doing, we stand over our findings."

    Sorry but you keep going on about the data When it is clear that it is irrelevant to base any decision on.


  • Options
    #199
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Timing belt wrote: »
    Sorry but you keep going on about the data When it is clear that it is irrelevant to base any decision on.

    I get that you’re not into data, but I think it’s important to understand it for long term planning decisions like house building.


  • Options
    #200
    Timing belt
    Registered Users Posts: 3,427 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    schmittel wrote: »
    I get that you’re not into data, but I think it’s important to understand it for long term planning decisions like house building.

    Yes I like data but understand from working with for 20+ years that it is not always correct dispute the best efforts of everyone involved and data on its own should not drive decision making.


  • Options
    #201
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Timing belt wrote: »
    Yes I like data but understand from working with for 20+ years that it is not always correct dispute the best efforts of everyone involved and data on its own should not drive decision making.

    My concern is 6% is so far away from what seems likely under the circumstances it cannot be ignored. We are way past the boundaries of rounding errors.

    It has to be explained somehow.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #202
    Timing belt
    Registered Users Posts: 3,427 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    schmittel wrote: »
    My concern is 6% is so far away from what seems likely under the circumstances it cannot be ignored. We are way past the boundaries of rounding errors.

    It has to be explained somehow.

    In a sentence how did you arrive at 6%.


  • Options
    #203
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Timing belt wrote: »
    In a sentence how did you arrive at 6%.

    See Simple question, simple answer post above.


  • Options
    #204
    Timing belt
    Registered Users Posts: 3,427 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    schmittel wrote: »
    See Simple question, simple answer post above.

    That’s not a sentence lol


  • Options
    #205
    Timing belt
    Registered Users Posts: 3,427 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    Timing belt wrote: »
    That’s not a sentence lol

    That still does not explain how you arrived at 6% for Dublin are you sure you extrapolated the data correctly when you were apportioning out the the total number. Or did you just use a % uplift


  • Options
    #206
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Timing belt wrote: »
    That still does not explain how you arrived at 6% for Dublin are you sure you extrapolated the data correctly when you were apportioning out the the total number. Or did you just use a % uplift

    I’m pretty confident 6% is a decent ball park in rounding error territory, of the situation at end of 2019.

    My gut tells me it is a little higher, but I recognize I’m on shakier ground trying to defend that.


  • Options
    #207
    Timing belt
    Registered Users Posts: 3,427 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    schmittel wrote: »
    I’m pretty confident 6% is a decent ball park in rounding error territory, of the situation at end of 2019.

    My gut tells me it is a little higher, but I recognize I’m on shakier ground trying to defend that.

    Are you rounding up geo data to cso figure to get to 6%


  • Options
    #208
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭hometruths


    All of the relevant reports are on geodirectory website, going back to 2016. It’s all there, but obviously more than one sentence worth of reading.


  • Options
    #209
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Timing belt wrote: »
    Are you rounding up geo data to cso figure to get to 6%

    Not rounding up, but yes I am adding additional units to geodata, estimates based on the cso data.

    I suspect Dublin City over 7%, maybe 8%


  • Options
    #210
    Timing belt
    Registered Users Posts: 3,427 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    schmittel wrote: »
    All of the relevant reports are on geodirectory website, going back to 2016. It’s all there, but obviously more than one sentence worth of reading.

    That’s not what I asked is your 6% based on cso or geo?

    If you are starting with geo and adding on what is missing that is in CSO have you taken into account the weighted distribution by county to get your 6% or have you just added x% onto geo figures. As it will give a very different answer.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #211
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Timing belt wrote: »
    That’s not what I asked is your 6% based on cso or geo?

    If you are starting with geo and adding on what is missing that is in CSO have you taken into account the weighted distribution by county to get your 6% or have you just added x% onto geo figures. As it will give a very different answer.

    My 6% based on geo.
    Yes, I have taken into account the different county figures.
    Easiest and quickest way to check accuracy of my calculations would surely be to do your own and see what you come up with?
    We’re way past one sentence here!


Advertisement