schmittel wrote: » Incidentally, whilst I was looking at examples for the above SCD & Wexford post I saw what I think will turn out to be a very interesting bellwether property sale:3 Northumberland Park, Dun Laoghaire, Co. Dublin - €595,000 Interesting because 1 Northumberland Park sold in 2017 for €545k and no 4 in 2018 for €565k. If this sells this year I think it will be a good example of the cookie cutters being priced at the margin I was talking about a few pages back. If it makes over €550k within the next 12 months I will eat my words and admit I was overly bearish on property.
GreeBo wrote: » You can't possibly make that statement though. You have nothing to base it on other than the fact that at the moment people are being forced to work from home. It wont be difficult if your employer says "come in or you are fired" FWIW I worked in a company that hotdesked about 10 years ago, with multiple employees originally from outside of Dublin between 20-30 years old and none of them moved out of Dublin due to hot desking. I think the idea that a large number of people are happy to give up the social aspect of working in an office (completely ignoring the other work impacts) is much smaller than a lot of people on here are expecting.
Captainsatnav wrote: » https://www.auctioneera.ie/house-prices-ireland-post-covid-19?fbclid=IwAR3CuHM4cBB9HT2vVKJjtXDq43L5zxKZgnZYZI6V4bVAMQavpUvozcj0jcI
Pivot Eoin wrote: » Lol, I used this exact house for my mortgage application, purely to push for an exception. No intentions of living there or buying. But the DunLaoghaire market when you're within 5 mins walk of the town you see an extra €100k thrown onto 3 bed prices. The above is a perfect example of that.
An estimated 70 per cent of public servants are now working remotely and early analysis is showing strong support to make remote working an accepted practice, rather than the exception.
House listings on the rise as confidence lifts Listings are set to rise significantly over coming weeks as more vendors make plans to put their homes on sale, in an early sign of recovering housing confidence.
Pivot Eoin wrote: » There is a stench of self-interest off this, seems to not consider a lot of huge factors.
cnocbui wrote: » Hah! Australia: also:
Mr Gurría said that just weeks ago, policymakers from the G20 club of rich nations believed the recovery would take a 'V' shape - with a short, sharp drop in economic activity followed swiftly by a rebound in growth. "It was already then mostly wishful thinking," he said. "I do not agree with the idea of a 'V' shaped phenomenon ... Right now we know it's not going to be a 'V'. It's going to be more in the best of cases like a 'U' with a long trench in the bottom before it gets to the recovery period. We can avoid it looking like an 'L', if we take the right decisions today."
The recessions of the eighties, the dot-com collapse, the much-hyped Y2K scare that never materialised, foot & mouth disease, MERS, SARS, 9-11, the property and financial markets crash of 2008 in hindsight all seem mild by comparison to the deadly global pandemic that has gripped the world at present. ...something in Europe was now very much on our doorstep and Ireland wasn’t going to avoid the pain being suffered elsewhere... ...emotions have been largely subdued by unprecedented government action to pay employers to keep people in work and generous COVID social welfare payments for those who have lost their jobs. But as things have rolled forward, questions such as will I keep my job, should we keep paying our rent, will it hurt our credit rating if we stop paying our mortgage... ...The reason I took the time to run through the above history of events is to contextualise the melting pot of uncertainty in which we are operating...
Yet many of these buyers who were sale agreed pre-COVID have now started to try to slash their offers in the hope of bagging a bargain. Vendors aren’t impressed, aren’t biting, the properties are being relisted and so the buyer loses out on a property that they can afford and that they want to live in; they are being too clever for their own good on occasions. What the bargain hunters are forgetting is that vendors only sell their property at fire-sale prices if they are distressed i.e. if they can’t keep up their mortgage payments, their lender receives on the asset (which usually takes years) and then the property goes on the market via a receiver. A receiver is only concerned with getting back what their client (the lender) is owed and so sets a low reserve at auction; such properties are typically bought by professional buyers who feel there is some value to be had. But guess what: no one’s distressed at present. This is what the bargain-hunters are forgetting.
OK So No Crash but they Must Go Down a Little Bit – Right?... As we move gradually back to normal throughout the summer, the stunted supply will start to bite as confidence starts to return. Those who lost their jobs will have found alternate employment and their plans will have been delayed not abandoned and they will start to return to the market. These dynamics will be supportive of prices firming as the year progresses.
Browney7 wrote: » On the one side they made an argument that prices rose in the boom despite a rake of supply because credit was cheap and plentiful yet they give no credit to the converse side of things now where availability of credit is likely to reduce. There are some points that have merit but the thought of the average couple who have been saving for a house having a rake more buying power because they've had no pints or dinners for the past two months doesn't hold up for me. If they have 3 or 4 grand more in their pocket it will be as much and will buy them a nicer couch and appliances if and when they buy a place as opposed to fuelling their house purchase war chest. Big underlying assumption appears to be that things will get back to normal and go on as we were. That's very optimistic in my opinion and I can't see house prices holding at current levels given it had been flatlining up until Covid struck anyway!
OwlsZat wrote: » Thanks for your unnamed quote, whoever's they were from the OECD chief strongly disagrees
cnocbui wrote: » It's behind a paywall, but have a look if you like: https://www.afr.com/
schmittel wrote: » I don't really buy the argument that the market will suddenly be full of buyers with deep pockets this summer because of lockdown savings. But the money saved thing is about the only bullish point I can see any potential in, and by that I mean a lot of people will have realised that actually living without all the trimmings like pints and a 3 euro coffees every day and weekly brunch, and all the other things we fritter our money on, is not that difficult. It is feasible that this year post lockdown there will be a far larger number of would be house buyers with an aggressive (and successful) savings plan who otherwise may not have got very far.
Snow Garden wrote: » I completely stand by that statement. WFH practices will almost certainly increase into the future. I imagine exponentially so. Covid19 has fast-tracked it. You forget one important thing. Broadband and WFH tools (Citrix, MS Teams, Cisco Webex etc) are improving year on year. They are making WFH more and more efficient. There will be massive investment in remote working technologies as a result of Covid. Check out the Citrix and Cisco share prices over the past 4 months.
Pivot Eoin wrote: » Dog Rough Properties could drop up to 20%. A friend just went sale agreed on a 2 bed on the coast in Blackrock for €280k last week. It's on the same row of houses as this one, same size, this one up for €435k. https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/17-rock-road-blackrock-co-dublin/4422242
GreeBo wrote: » The technologies aren't the issue though. Unless you have a holographic interface you will not replicate the adhoc conversations that are the oil of most companies.
smurgen wrote: » You're literally telling us WFH is useless and no one will go for it despite it being implemented now and despite multiple surveys at the moment of people saying they want it continued after lock down. Sounds pretty self serving to me.
OwlsZat wrote: » That website and article is about Australia?
SozBbz wrote: » Would I be right in thinking that your the property your friend is SA on is in need of significant work? Even still probably a good buy at that price. The one you've linked is immaculate and the location is great. I've seen worse value out there. 2 beds like that are great homes for a young person/couple, espcially near the dart. Great alternative to an apartment, if you've the stomach (and the cash) to do the work.
Pivot Eoin wrote: » Ah yeah, like i Said. Dog Rough. It needs 80-100k. But I'm just saying that all in they'll have invested 350-370k and have a house like the one linked.
Business organisation Ibec said the "new normal" will see more employees work remotely in the future. Some 83% of the 7,241 respondents to a new survey want to be able to work at home at least some of the time, with 12% indicating they want to work remotely on a daily basis. Of those who responded, 51% had never worked remotely before.
mcbert wrote: » Thats 90's thinking right there. Its not for everyone but many companies do it, and it can and does work well for many employers and employees
schmittel wrote: » Worth quoting the numbers. Business organisation Ibec said the "new normal" will see more employees work remotely in the future. Some 83% of the 7,241 respondents to a new survey want to be able to work at home at least some of the time, with 12% indicating they want to work remotely on a daily basis. Of those who responded, 51% had never worked remotely before. Maeve McElwee, director of employer relations with Ibec, says there will be a significant permanent shift into home-working after the crisis. GreeBo says "You can't possibly make that statement though. You have nothing to base it on other than the fact that at the moment people are being forced to work from home....."
SozBbz wrote: » You've answered your own question though....the vast majority only want partial WFH, a much smaller cohort wasnt to exclusivly WFH. People working from home some of the time will hopefully bring all sorts of benefits such as less traffic on the roads and environmental impact etc, but it wouldnt make people necessarily want to move away from urban centers. I think while employers will be more flexible, fully WFH only suits certain jobs and certain personalities. Most of us need at least some real time contact wtih our co-workers.
schmittel wrote: » Sorry, I don't follow - what was my own question that I answered?
SozBbz wrote: » The piece you posted from IBEC (who are basically a lobby group BTW) doesnt disprove what GreeBo has said.
SozBbz wrote: » Well obviously it remains to be seen what price the imaculate house will achieve, but, it seems like your friend will have done well, even if prices drop, theres always going to be value in a house in that location. It would rent well if they couldnt/dont want to sell it even if they outgrow it themselves. Vincents hospital alone would provide a pool of potential tenants. While personally I've always done work when I've bought property, I know people who literally can't handle more than a lick of paint. Certain people can't see beyond whats in front of them, and unless its already "done" they won't be interested. Sure its how small scale developers have made a living forever.
