Investment Firms Buying Estates

lawrencesummers

‘ We’are the authorities.

The problem is lack of supply, what concrete measures have the government implemented to increase supply?


None. Absolutely none.

coolshannagh28

lawrencesummers wrote: »

‘ We’are the authorities.

The problem is lack of supply, what concrete measures have the government implemented to increase supply?


None. Absolutely none.

The question that needs to be answered is this; is the govt remotely interested in solving the housing problem?
After the crash when the govt took control of the banks it could have used them to raise capital and the NAMA land banks to finance affordable housing instead Noonan went to the US and incentivised Vultures followed by REITS to purchase and build tax free ,effectively outsourcing the problem ,now it has blown up in their face.
One argument is that our €200 billion national debt forced their hand aided by warnings from the Troika , another is that our govt is too cosy with US big money and the then US treasury secretary Timothy Geithner forced Noonan to accept the takeover of the housing sector as the price for continued US FDI .
Interestingly Geithner now heads up a Hedge Fund .

Pussyhands

lawrencesummers wrote: »

That would only hamper those who need to rent the overpriced property.

This problem is created by government policy, and government policy alone can resolve it.

Short term pain, long term gain.

Browney7

What was interesting this evening that after the big announcement, the government parties wheeled out a Mary Fitzpatrick (a FF senator who is a spokesperson on housing) on Prime Time and SF wheeled out O'Broin.

You would think that those responsible would want to extoll the virtues of their new policies to a national audience and hammer it home. Just thought it was curious.

Finally, if we are led to believe that funds outbid Councils/AHBs by 80k on average per unit (https://www.newstalk.com/news/investment-funds-outbid-affordable-housing-bodies-on-more-than-400-homes-in-the-last-month-1191845), a 10% stamp duty wouldn't have been effective. They'd have just outbid by 40k and pay the 10% tax.

Pat Davitt said it succinctly in a piece in the SBP with Killian Woods where he said [in the context of the state making rules and changes and agreeing to long term 25 year leases]: "these funds aren't coming over from America, Germany and Japan because they love us, they're coming over because they're getting a very good deal. What we need to make sure is that the deal we're getting suits us"

StupidLikeAFox

lawrencesummers wrote: »

UP to 50% of houses to be set aside for owner occupiers.

Another way of putting that is up to 100% can be left open for the cuckoo funds

lawrencesummers

Pussyhands wrote: »

Short term pain, long term gain.

I’m not in favour of pitching citizen against citizen because of government incompetence.

mariaalice

What I find interesting is, on the one hand, you get commentator and a good number agree with them saying that we need a continental type housing market where long therm renting is the norm when that appears to be emerging there is an outrage.

That 23-year-old TD who says he can't afford a house should have been booted out of it, no single 23 years old should be looking to buy a house it's borderline nonsense.

I do have empathy for the first-time buyer but I am not sure what the answer is.

My husband brother and his wife, now in their 60s don't own a house they rent his career took him all over the World and then the UK and they are wealthy they last owned a house about 15 years ago, their children were not harmed by living like that, they are now talking of retiring to France why they may rent or buy but no pressure to do either.

I dont know what the answer is but the days of a young couple aged 23 and 25 being able to buy a house are long gone and are not coming back.

lawrencesummers

mariaalice wrote: »

What I find interesting is, on the one hand, you get commentator and a good number agree with them saying that we need a continental type housing market where long therm renting is the norm when that appears to be emerging there is an outrage.

That 23-year-old TD who says he can't afford a house should have been booted out of it, no single 23 years old should be looking to buy a house it's borderline nonsense.

I do have empathy for the first-time buyer but I am not sure what the answer is.

My husband brother and his wife, now in their 60s don't own a house they rent his career took him all over the World and then the UK and they are wealthy they last owned a house about 15 years ago, their children were not harmed by living like that, they are now talking of retiring to France why they may rent or buy but no pressure to do either.

I dont know what the answer is but the days of a young couple aged 23 and 25 being able to buy a house are long gone and are not coming back.

I don’t agree. Not in the slightest.

If a young person has the maturity, desire and finances to buy a house then they should be able to.

It might not be for you or me, but it should be a possibility it that’s what people want.

maestroamado

When we see a Government agency NAMA which was set to manage state assets during the crisis.
Then they sell the assets on to Corporations. CRAZY STUFF...
Why do we put up with it....

Pussyhands

Browney7 wrote: »

What was interesting this evening that after the big announcement, the government parties wheeled out a Mary Fitzpatrick (a FF senator who is a spokesperson on housing) on Prime Time and SF wheeled out O'Broin.

You would think that those responsible would want to extoll the virtues of their new policies to a national audience and hammer it home. Just thought it was curious.

Finally, if we are led to believe that funds outbid Councils/AHBs by 80k on average per unit (https://www.newstalk.com/news/investment-funds-outbid-affordable-housing-bodies-on-more-than-400-homes-in-the-last-month-1191845), a 10% stamp duty wouldn't have been effective. They'd have just outbid by 40k and pay the 10% tax.

Pat Davitt said it succinctly in a piece in the SBP with Killian Woods where he said [in the context of the state making rules and changes and agreeing to long term 25 year leases]: "these funds aren't coming over from America, Germany and Japan because they love us, they're coming over because they're getting a very good deal. What we need to make sure is that the deal we're getting suits us"

Timmy Dooley just admitted on the tonight show what many thought, the government don't want the banks at risk so they offload it to these investment firms.

Problem is....if all these investment firms are desperate to buy everything going....that tells you something...they're not all wrong!

Pussyhands

lawrencesummers wrote: »

I don’t agree. Not in the slightest.

If a young person has the maturity, desire and finances to buy a house then they should be able to.

It might not be for you or me, but it should be a possibility it that’s what people want.

They're unlikely to have the finances at 23 though. if they work from age 18 then they probably won't be earning huge money and if they have a qualification then they'll just be out of college.

CollyFlower

Is it true, but I heard that an investment fund bought a €4000 house for double that?!... Did that really happen?

Flinty997

lawrencesummers wrote: »

I don’t agree. Not in the slightest.

If a young person has the maturity, desire and finances to buy a house then they should be able to.

It might not be for you or me, but it should be a possibility it that’s what people want.

I'm not entirely sure what this comment means.

Anyone who has the finances can buy a house. If you are outbid then you don't have the finances. Age has nothing to do with it.

Flinty997

Pussyhands wrote: »

They're unlikely to have the finances at 23 though. if they work from age 18 then they probably won't be earning huge money and if they have a qualification then they'll just be out of college.

..or an Apprenticeship.

I'm sure you could find a fixer upper somewhere if you wanted to get into property.

Dav010

Flinty997 wrote: »

I'm not entirely sure what this comment means.

Anyone who has the finances can buy a house. If you are outbid then you don't have the finances. Age has nothing to do with it.

Agree. Has there ever been a time when people had a right to buy where they want for as much as they want? I know I couldn’t when I was in my 20’s or even for most of my 30’s in the eighties and nineties.

People keep going on about not being able to buy the home they want now, no generation was ever able to do that.

Pussyhands

Flinty997 wrote: »

..or an Apprenticeship.

I'm sure you could find a fixer upper somewhere if you wanted to get into property.

You need to have proof you have the funds to do it up.

Minister for housing was on Newstalk this evening, chatting about the new measures, of which the 10% stamp duty was the big one.

However, he said something else, twice, and yer man hosting (Ciaran?) never asked him to elaborate or explain further. Minister said that all new planning permissions will be based on one purchase only. Which is a very vague sentence. And 10% duty kicks in after you buy 9 houses.

So.. my interpretation of that, is that an investment firm will only be able to buy one house per new development, and once they go over 9 houses in a calendar year, they pay stamp duty at 10%. So in theory, if they only bought new houses in new developments, in order to secure 9 houses, they would need to buy in 9 new developments...?

(of course anything that currently exists, or has already had planning permission granted, they can buy as much as they like, this only affects new planning permissions granted today onwards)?


If this is true, it's a massive step in the right direction. But it was said twice and glossed over with not further explanation.

Flinty997

Pussyhands wrote: »

You need to have proof you have the funds to do it up.

Financing a project is generally the hard part. If it was easy everyone would do it.

Wanderer78

Flinty997 wrote:

Financing a project is generally the hard part. If it was easy everyone would do it.

It depends really, it's all risk management, but the state does have to step up to the plate here, it's become too risky for everyone not to build now

maestroamado

Flinty997 wrote: »

Financing a project is generally the hard part. If it was easy everyone would do it.

The problem here is it is the very people who are supposed to make it easy are the ones who are making it difficult.
Its good enough for us as we put up with it...

zerosugarbuzz

Dav010 wrote: »

Agree. Has there ever been a time when people had a right to buy where they want for as much as they want? I know I couldn’t when I was in my 20’s or even for most of my 30’s in the eighties and nineties.

People keep going on about not being able to buy the home they want now, no generation was ever able to do that.

I had an average job in the late 80s /90s. Bought my first house aged 23 by saving the deposit and getting a mortgage. Most of my friends did the same by the time they were 30 latest. It wasn’t a big deal or an achievement back then, it was just what people did.

Wanderer78

zerosugarbuzz wrote: »

I had an average job in the late 80s /90s. Bought my first house aged 23 by saving the deposit and getting a mortgage. Most of my friends did the same by the time they were 30 latest. It wasn’t a big deal or an achievement back then, it was just what people did.

differences are now so great between generations, that they simply cannot be compared, yes buying a home has always been difficult, but we re now in a situation that a significant number of people, many well educated, and with good careers, simply cannot, and some may never be able to, something is catastrophically failing

Cal4567

zerosugarbuzz wrote: »

I had an average job in the late 80s /90s. Bought my first house aged 23 by saving the deposit and getting a mortgage. Most of my friends did the same by the time they were 30 latest. It wasn’t a big deal or an achievement back then, it was just what people did.

Could the you of 30 years ago with your average job, buy a house today, do you think, or even the same house? Genuine question.

We bought our first house in 82. No way could I buy that now, given the same circumstances.

Flinty997

Cal4567 wrote: »

Could the you of 30 years ago with your average job, buy a house today, do you think, or even the same house? Genuine question.

We bought our first house in 82. No way could I buy that now, given the same circumstances.

Ireland wasn't the same go to location attracting inwards migration of 50k a year from across the world back then. They also were still building council houses. You could leave one rented place and find another move into another the same afternoon. Rental places were pretty poor quality.

If you want to recreate the situation pick a place with decades of no investment, net emigration and see if you could afford to live there. You probably could.

Flinty997

This happened before in places like London. People grew up in place that became unaffordable to live when they became adults so they had to move out of where they grew up in.

Wanderer78

Flinty997 wrote: »

This happened before in places like London. People grew up in place that became unaffordable to live when they became adults so they had to move out of where they grew up in.

...this approach causes all sorts of complex social issues and dysfunctions, the break down of social cohesion etc

mariaalice

The underlying reason why money is flowing into property assets and a substantial number left unlet has to be tackled. It's apparently something to do with low inflation as the money has to go somewhere.

Wanderer78

mariaalice wrote: »

The underlying reason why money is flowing into property assets and a substantial number left unlet has to be tackled. It's apparently something to do with low inflation as the money has to go somewhere.

...we ve spent the last few decades lubing the pathways towards asset markets, so much so, as soon as money is created in either the public or private domains, it floods straight for these markets. this is ultimately what caused the 08 crash, we decided the best thing to do, was do virtually nothing, so here we are...... we have been experiencing high asset price inflation v's low wage inflation, from this approach, its now starting to collapse.....

Flinty997

Wanderer78 wrote: »

...we ve spent the last few decades lubing the pathways towards asset markets, so much so, as soon as money is created in either the public or private domains, it floods straight for these markets. this is ultimately what caused the 08 crash, we decided the best thing to do, was do virtually nothing, so here we are...... we have been experiencing high asset price inflation v's low wage inflation, from this approach, its now starting to collapse.....

More a credit bubble and lack of regulatory oversight, with Govt neglect of same.

Flinty997

mariaalice wrote: »

The underlying reason why money is flowing into property assets and a substantial number left unlet has to be tackled. It's apparently something to do with low inflation as the money has to go somewhere.

Its attractive because of low supply and increased demand.

Its not accidental, its deliberate firestorm.