fliball123 wrote: » How do you come to that conclusion? Supply vs demand basics of how to determine a price of something you have 10 properties and 5 are taken away and made available for rent meaning supply goes down??
ciaranmul wrote: » The data is also very much being manipulated by estate agents, like DNG a few weeks ago, who deleted hundreds of ads and put them back up again, a lot of them with lower prices. So this doesn't show up in the area price decreases data. Also, every single ad was listed as "detached" for some strange reason. These ads and price decreases would only have been picked up on if you had your eye on the properties.
schmittel wrote: » Thanks. Mar 24 2019 - April 24 2019 - 4758 properties sold. Mar 24 2020 - April 24 2020 - 2583 properties sold. Demand down 50% year on year!
schmittel wrote: » Reading this, I think my understanding of what drives prices is sufficiently far away from yours that it is pointless to try and explain my reasoning to you. I suspect one of us does not understand the subject well enough to realise we don't understand it at all. Of course, it may be me so I will follow the advice that it is better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid, than open it and remove all doubt.
schmittel wrote: » Of course, it may be me so I will follow the advice that it is better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid, than open it and remove all doubt.
fliball123 wrote: » So shut up then
GreeBo wrote: » I call out nonsense where ever I see it. I didnt see anyone shutting down anyone else, merely pointing out that a couple of anecdotal stories doesnt really amount to much. I dont know why you (and some others) have a bee in your bonnet about putting people into camps of "increase" or "decrease". Either way, it doesn't apply to me, so knock it off thanks.
Padre_Pio wrote: » Schmittel: It is better to remain silent and be thought the fool, then to open your mouth and remove all doubt. Fliball’s Brain: Uh-oh, what did that mean? Better say something or they’ll think you’re stupid. Fliball: Takes one to know one! Fliball’s Brain: Swish!
Marius34 wrote: » No, it's not. That's sales from Property Price Register. There is some delay on properties to be recorded on their Public database.
Padre_Pio wrote: » No. Completed house purchases down 50% on last year. If things were business as usual you may equate that to demand, but you can't given the extraordinary circumstances we're in now. County councils are for the majority closed. Solicitors are out of office Estate agents are out of office. Engineers are closed. There's no viewings, no site visits and a hundred other things that could delay the completion of a sale.
TheSheriff wrote: » Pulled out of our sale agreed.......willing to roll the dice and see where we are in a few months.
TheSheriff wrote: » Thought I'd update on here for any purchasers out there who might be reading. I posted the above 2 weeks back, we pulled out of a sale despite negotiating 20k off the sale agreed price. In the end we decided we didn't LOVE the property, and were more going for it out of necessity (renting etc.). Took our chance with the inevitable "Covid-Crash" Decided to roll the dice, and it's been worth it (so far). A property we bid on several months back came back on the scene last week. We had bid initially a fairly low ball offer as there is a lot of cosmetic work needed... the EA at the time practically laughed at us, told us we wouldn't be considered serious purchasers etc. We quickly walked away, not to be for us at the time obviously and we decided this location/house type was likely out of our scope (price region close to 500K). We are now sale agreed on this house (after nail-biting "who'll blink first" negotiating) at over 10% below asking and we've gotten (what we feel is) a far superior location, aspect etc. etc. Delighted at the moment, but realize we are a long way off closing and if things improve maybe the vendor will reconsider the sale agreed price. Obviously being fairly vague with numbers, but its a significant saving for us on the asking. The golden rule I've learned from all this; as soon as you start to think an EA is telling you the truth, being honest or perhaps has your interest in mind, walk away, you've already lost.
TheSheriff wrote: » The golden rule I've learned from all this; as soon as you start to think an EA is telling you the truth, being honest or perhaps has your interest in mind, walk away, you've already lost.
TheSheriff wrote: » Thought I'd update on here for any purchasers out there who might be reading. I posted the above 2 weeks back, we pulled out of a sale despite negotiating 20k off the sale agreed price. In the end we decided we didn't LOVE the property, and were more going for it out of necessity (renting etc.). Took our chance with the inevitable "Covid-Crash" Decided to roll the dice, and it's been worth it (so far). A property we bid on several months back came back on the scene last week. We had bid initially a fairly low ball offer as there is a lot of cosmetic work needed... the EA at the time practically laughed at us, told us we wouldn't be considered serious purchasers etc. We quickly walked away, not to be for us at the time obviously and we decided this location/house type was likely out of our scope (price region close to 500K). We are now sale agreed on this house (after nail-biting "who'll blink first" negotiating) at over 10% below asking and we've gotten (what we feel is) a far superior location, aspect etc. etc. Delighted at the moment, but realize we are a long way off closing and if things improve maybe the vendor will reconsider the sale agreed price. Obviously being fairly vague with numbers, but its a significant saving for us on the asking.The golden rule I've learned from all this; as soon as you start to think an EA is telling you the truth, being honest or perhaps has your interest in mind, walk away, you've already lost.
Cyrus wrote: » So is your 10 percent below asking against a new asking price or the original asking price ?
fliball123 wrote: » Wow that really told me are you going to send me to bed with no dinner now?
TheSheriff wrote: » We are slightly greater than 10% under the original asking price. In reality what it means for us is a house in a better location, with the aspect we wanted at the same price we were willing to pay last month for a house in a less desirable area, north facing garden. The house went sale agreed about two months back close to asking but the buyer pulled out. Caveat; an EA told us this, so assume its a lie, but it was "sale agreed" online for a few weeks we noted. I remember checking it online and feeling a bit down/demotivated when we first saw it go sale agreed, as we really liked it.
DB197840 wrote: » Has anyone managed to extend their mortgage approval? We got approved before Covid 19, runs out the end of July. Haven’t been able to obviously view properties for weeks. Both moved back home to parents a week now from the sale of our own house. We don’t think we will get approved for as much after all this is over if we have to apply again.Both in fairly secure jobs that haven’t been impacted and I know approval in principle means nothing until you can actually draw down.
fliball123 wrote: » Basically the general thread on here has been that demand has dropped off to zero. I have been asking where people are getting their evidence and they have had none. I have said that there were still people buying which ppr and myhome prove that sales are still going on there fore there is still demand. I have also been using myhome to track both properties available on myhome which has come down by about 12% in the last month and rentals which is up significantly. I have been saying that yes demand will go down but so will supply. I have contended that prices will not drop like they did last time in 2008 due to a number of factors..So I will out line them again. Last recession we had an over supply of housing currently we have a chronic undersupply Last recession we had the release valve of emigration as in some countries finances actually got better Australia sticks out like a sore thumb for this. A lot of people decided to get out of dodge and go to a warmer country and wait a few years till things got better here. That is not an option this time as Corona is all over the world. Before the last recession the banks had over extended giving stupid loans like 110% mortgages and trackers meaning they were over exposed. This is not the case leading up to this recession they have adhered to prudent financial rules such as 80/20 etc and are in a lot better shape than before. Last recession cost us 200 billion. Even if we stay as we currently are with the current levels and the forecast levels of 25% unemployment by the end of the year and we keep paying what we are paying it at least till the end of next year the bill will only be an additional 30/40 billion a lot less than before. Also with the option of refinancing the current 200 billion at a lower rate will save us a fair whack of cash on that. Last recession banks did get some properties back off home owners due to relentless hounding and people just giving up. This time people in their house know the banks can do diddly squat and cannot repossess your house even if they stop paying their mortgage. So the dynamics are a lot different. I have stated my opinion that prices will drop but they will not go into or anywhere near double digit drops and that anyone who avails of this drop will be buying a pig with lipstick as the properties currently available are not great and those soon to be coming on stream will be from the but to let market and will not be in great shape. As for the whole thread I wouldn't advise anyone to buy or sell currently there are too many unknowns..
Last recession we had an over supply of housing currently we have a chronic undersupply
Last recession we had the release valve of emigration as in some countries finances actually got better Australia sticks out like a sore thumb for this. A lot of people decided to get out of dodge and go to a warmer country and wait a few years till things got better here. That is not an option this time as Corona is all over the world.
Before the last recession the banks had over extended giving stupid loans like 110% mortgages and trackers meaning they were over exposed. This is not the case leading up to this recession they have adhered to prudent financial rules such as 80/20 etc and are in a lot better shape than before.
Last recession cost us 200 billion. Even if we stay as we currently are with the current levels and the forecast levels of 25% unemployment by the end of the year and we keep paying what we are paying it at least till the end of next year the bill will only be an additional 30/40 billion a lot less than before. Also with the option of refinancing the current 200 billion at a lower rate will save us a fair whack of cash on that.
Last recession banks did get some properties back off home owners due to relentless hounding and people just giving up. This time people in their house know the banks can do diddly squat and cannot repossess your house even if they stop paying their mortgage.
schmittel wrote: » I think double digit drops are a certainty and I'd have a few thoughts on those "this time it's different factors" you list. In terms of housing stock we are pretty much the same now as in 2008 at just under 500 dwellings per 1000 population. Or in other words 1 house per every 2 people in the country. Source OECD - https://www.oecd.org/els/family/HM1-1-Housing-stock-and-construction.pdf This is true, but we will see this time a huge outflow of foreign workers/students returning to their home countries. Of course it may be that we get a huge influx of returning Irish for the same reason. Either way I don't think the net migration effect will be materially different from the last recession. Yes this is true the banks cut back all lending but to only the most prudent - i.e if you had 20% deposit and rock solid income in 2010 you could get a mortgage. That will be the same now. What will also be the same is the volume of mortgages drawn down will drop significantly because there will be less people with 20% deposit and rock solid incomes - i.e a smaller number of buyers. The relative strength of the banks balance sheets will not make a difference to the fact they'll pull up the drawbridge. Not disputing that this might cost us less but I don't see how any relatively lower length of time repaying the debt for future generations will soften falls in house prices today. Unemployment of 25% and a stonking recession will cause prices to drop fairly sharpish in my opinion. I agree with this 100%, and I actually think the crash would have been bigger and longer last time but for the lack of repos. I think this time consequences will be felt on the demand side more than supply. ie. the banks will be once bitten twice shy and be very conservative in their valuations to those fewer mortgages that they do approve. We've seen this already and it will have a significant effect on sales prices.
Hubertj wrote: » I’m not sure there will be a massive outflow if foreign workers returning to their home country. That will be country dependent as a large number will be in a far bigger mess than Ireland. I do agree with the rest of your points. Government and EU policy will be key in how long the recession will last. There are also opportunities - MNCs will need to ensure they do not have single source / single points of failure in their supply chains. That will see repatriation of some supply chain to Europe. That has started on my company already.
schmittel wrote: » In terms of housing stock we are pretty much the same now as in 2008 at just under 500 dwellings per 1000 population. Or in other words 1 house per every 2 people in the country. Source OECD - https://www.oecd.org/els/family/HM1-1-Housing-stock-and-construction.pdf
The Student wrote: Have to agree with you. Polish friends have told me the social welfare payments in Ireland provide a better standard of living than Polish social welfare payments. Polish would prefer to be unemployed in Ireland rather than Poland.
fliball123 wrote: Before the last recession the banks had over extended giving stupid loans like 110% mortgages and trackers meaning they were over exposed. This is not the case leading up to this recession they have adhered to prudent financial rules such as 80/20 etc and are in a lot better shape than before.
fliball123 wrote: Last recession cost us 200 billion. Even if we stay as we currently are with the current levels and the forecast levels of 25% unemployment by the end of the year and we keep paying what we are paying it at least till the end of next year the bill will only be an additional 30/40 billion a lot less than before. Also with the option of refinancing the current 200 billion at a lower rate will save us a fair whack of cash on that.
fliball123 wrote: Last recession banks did get some properties back off home owners due to relentless hounding and people just giving up. This time people in their house know the banks can do diddly squat and cannot repossess your house even if they stop paying their mortgage.
fliball123 wrote: So the dynamics are a lot different. I have stated my opinion that prices will drop but they will not go into or anywhere near double digit drops and that anyone who avails of this drop will be buying a pig with lipstick as the properties currently available are not great and those soon to be coming on stream will be from the but to let market and will not be in great shape.
Marius34 wrote: » The housing stock went down from around 437 dwellings per 1000 population in 2008, to around 413 dwellings per 1000 in 2019. Apart from this families are getting smaller, so its quite a big issue. Here is an example of the issue this causing: 2011 vs 2016 census (CSO): "The number of adults, aged 18 years and over, who were working and still living at home increased by 19 per cent between 2011 and 2016, increasing from 180,703 to 215,088. The data is presented by single year of age in Figure 2.9. Those aged 30 to 34 saw a 26 per cent increase rising from 23,835 to 30,137 over the five years."
schmittel wrote: » Utter nonsense. Those rises are nothing to do with the housing stock. Guarantee you those same numbers will be falling over the next 12-18 months.
Marius34 wrote: » May you elaborate please, why it's a nonsense? I'm not sure whats thoughts behind it?
Marius34 wrote: » The issue that quite often here people are manipulating the data, which doesn't really present the actual Property Market, but rather what they want to see.
schmittel wrote: » You are stating that a relatively minor fall in the housing stock caused a major % rise of working adults living with at home with parent/s: This is completely misleading because you are quoting stats for working adults - obviously these stats are influenced by the number of jobs available rather than the number of houses available - i.e the big jump in number of working adults living at home was because there was a big jump in working adults full stop. Unemployment in 2011 was about 15%, double what it was in 2016 at about 7.5% The figures are less alarming if you look at the numbers of all adults living at home: In 2011 there were 439,478 adults, aged 18 years and over living at home. In 2016 there were 458,874 adults, aged 18 years and over living at home. An increase of 19,396 or 4.4% Source - https://statbank.cso.ie/px/pxeirestat/Statire/SelectVarVal/Define.asp?maintable=E4097&PLanguage=0 Total population increased in that time by 3.8% - https://static.rasset.ie/documents/news/census-2016-summary-results-part-1-full.pdf Not an alarming increase at all. Just data manipulation. You should know better: There is a big problem in this country with an inefficient use of the existing housing stock but the idea that there is a crisis chronic shortage is overhyped massively.
