nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Property Market 2020

Bigmac1euro

Maybe an article for “Property Market 2020”
Anyhow looks like developers are going to start strangling supply in order to keep prices in check.

Worth a read anyway.

https://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/developers-now-fear-flooding-market-as-house-prices-in-decline-38820967.html

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Assetbacked

beauf wrote: »

They have never tried to fix it.... From what I can see...

True, I guess!

beauf

Assetbacked wrote: »

I ....It's amusing that the most destructive parties to the housing market are joining together and somehow think they will fix it.

They have never tried to fix it.... From what I can see...

Assetbacked

cnocbui wrote: »

How timely. Here is a great reminder of what bunch of Ftards the Greens are:

https://www.rte.ie/lifestyle/motors/2017/0405/865457-former-green-minister-regrets-decision-to-promote-diesel-engines/

That's from 2017. Did the government ever do anything to reverse this admitted stupidity? Did they hell.

They never learn.

I mean, that is a complaint in respect of the environment.

However, to make a complaint about a political party relevant for a property market thread; FF and the Greens oversaw a catastrophic property market crash and FG in power has lead to arguably the worst housing crisis in living memory. It's amusing that the most destructive parties to the housing market are joining together and somehow think they will fix it.

cnocbui

How timely. Here is a great reminder of what bunch of Ftards the Greens are:

The former Green Party minister, Eamon Ryan, has agreed with a former British government advisor that decisions to give diesel cars a tax advantage were wrong.

https://www.rte.ie/lifestyle/motors/2017/0405/865457-former-green-minister-regrets-decision-to-promote-diesel-engines/

That's from 2017. Did the government ever do anything to reverse this admitted stupidity? Did they hell.

They never learn.

Brianmwalker

The_Conductor wrote: »

We already have carbon tax- it increased by €6 from €20 per tonne to €26 per tonne on the 1st of May. The proposal is to increase carbon tax by a further €20 per tonne - to €46 per tonne (immediately) with subsequent increases in future years (to punish carbon users- or in Green Party talk- incentivise users to use alternate energy sources)

In terms of petrol the €20 per tonne increase will lead to the cost of the carbon tax component of a 60 litre fill of petrol increasing from €4.42 to €7.90 (ish), and for diesel from €5.11 to approx €9.20 (thats just the carbon tax aspect- in short its another 7c on a litre of petrol or diesel)

In addition it will add approx €110 to the annual carbon tax bill for someone who heats their house with gas.

It will also add €2.40 to a 40KG bag of coal, €0.55 to a 12.5KG bale of briquettes and €52 to a 900 litre fill of kerosene home heating oil.

For now there is no carbon tax on electricity- where we have a Public Service Levy (PSO Levy) instead- though they also want to change this...........

Wow that's a serious tax!

The_Conductor

combat14 wrote: »

new FF/FG and green party carbon taxes on the way in

We already have carbon tax- it increased by €6 from €20 per tonne to €26 per tonne on the 1st of May. The proposal is to increase carbon tax by a further €20 per tonne - to €46 per tonne (immediately) with subsequent increases in future years (to punish carbon users- or in Green Party talk- incentivise users to use alternate energy sources)

In terms of petrol the €20 per tonne increase will lead to the cost of the carbon tax component of a 60 litre fill of petrol increasing from €4.42 to €7.90 (ish), and for diesel from €5.11 to approx €9.20 (thats just the carbon tax aspect- in short its another 7c on a litre of petrol or diesel)

In addition it will add approx €110 to the annual carbon tax bill for someone who heats their house with gas.

It will also add €2.40 to a 40KG bag of coal, €0.55 to a 12.5KG bale of briquettes and €52 to a 900 litre fill of kerosene home heating oil.

For now there is no carbon tax on electricity- where we have a Public Service Levy (PSO Levy) instead- though they also want to change this...........

[Deleted User]

The crisis might not abate for quite a while.
Anyone who can wfh & who has been doing so since March will be doing so until into 2021 IMO.

combat14

combat14 wrote: »

what affect will the new green party 20 euro a diesel car refuel have

rural dwellers will be screaming to work at home once that kicks in

new FF/FG and green party carbon taxes on the way in

Hubertj

Villa05 wrote: »

Interesting debate from 12 months ago on housing and potential solutions to the supply issue with politicians lame excuses to not implementing them, gives alot of credence to schmittel argument that there is an oversupply of actual 3+ bed houses and not enough 1 and 2 bed units.

Came across it when researching the O Cualann model for delivery of affordable housing which claims to be a zero cost to the state of delivering affordable housing. The housing can only be sold within the model so they stay as affordable housing and only rise with the pace of general inflation

Seems a highly workable way to deliver affordable housing.

Definite merit in the affordable housing model. My only concern would be the ability to scale this model within a reasonable time frame. That needs to be professionally done and not made a balls of by public servants.

c.p.w.g.w

combat14 wrote: »

what affect will the new green party 20 euro a diesel car refuel have

rural dwellers will be screaming to work at home once that kicks in

Whats this charge?

combat14

what affect will the new green party 20 euro a diesel car refuel have

rural dwellers will be screaming to work at home once that kicks in

The_Conductor

theballz wrote: »

IT is very broad. Not a great example.

+1
I was a team lead for Microsoft on an outsourced contract with a third party provider (who shall remain nameless- but there are many from around boards who cut their teeth there).
The starting pay was 22k (and this is for multilingual workers) and the staff turnover was over 200% (aka the average person quit after less than 6 months).

The thing is- there was an endless flow of kids who were willing to take posts there- its not that you needed a specific qualification (though the company paid for MCSEs etc for anyone who wishes to pursue them).

I've grad and postgrad qualifications in IT disciplines- I was very much an outlier- though even my pay (at that time) was crap, and I jumped ship as soon as a better opportunity arose.

There are lots of well paid IT jobs out there- but they tend to require very specific skillsets- its very much a misnomer to suggest that IT jobs are well paid- there are plenty of monkeys working in IT who are being paid peanuts.

combat14

looks like WFH is the way to go for next while..

Second wave fears rise as China reports more new infections

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2020/0614/1147309-china-new-cases/

JJJackal

ebayissues wrote: »

I don't see 400 in the office by decembr this year. Had to imagine.

I also work in an office with same amount, there were survey sent out but no mention of when we are back. With the 1m/2m distancing, It'll be diffcult to have 400 in the office.

Offices should be at reduced capcaity 30% - 40% of work force.

Now if emplyers really want staff back in the office with Cov19 going on, that that tells me WFH in the future is pretty much not going to be the way forward. Maybe this is just for financial companies.

The biggest problem for a company who gets everyone back to the office is when there is a COVID outbreak in the company. It could run through a floor of staff pretty quickly and then spread to other floors. A whole department could be off work for 2 plus weeks. A part that has not been considered as it wasnt a concern in lockdown is lets say John gets COVID at work. John brings it home to Mary. John has symptoms on Day 1. Mary gets more sever symptoms 10 days after John (had a cough at D1 so didnt isolate; plus not really possible for her). After 2 weeks John is 100% fully well. Mary still has a cough and fevers. Can John go back to work? Or does John need to stay off for another 2 weeks plus? Going to be messy

ebayissues

TheSheriff wrote: »

Agreed there are risks and not sure how our facilities will manage things. It'll be a staggered restart.

But the majority of our workforce want to return to the office. We've been running surveys for the last few weeks.

I know friends in other companies seeing the same

I don't see 400 in the office by decembr this year. Had to imagine.

I also work in an office with same amount, there were survey sent out but no mention of when we are back. With the 1m/2m distancing, It'll be diffcult to have 400 in the office.

Offices should be at reduced capcaity 30% - 40% of work force.

Now if emplyers really want staff back in the office with Cov19 going on, that that tells me WFH in the future is pretty much not going to be the way forward. Maybe this is just for financial companies.

TheSheriff

JJJackal wrote: »

I think companies where most people remain in the office 4+ days a week are taking an awful risk - for example in TheSheriffs case there are 400+ people in his office.

The only reason it makes sense for all these to go to the office is if social interaction benefits productivity or is required for good functioning of the company (dont really believe this is the case).

So lets say TheSheriff goes to the office - alot of offices have separate offices for managers etc but often an open floor plan for more junior staff - TheSheriff is a manager in this story and shares the office with one other - TheSheriff goes and speaks to 6 members of staff he supervises on his first day back - trying to maintain social distancing etc etc. On day 2 TheSheriff starts coughing. He has now had contact with the person he shares the office with and at minimum the 6 staff on the floor. He also had lunch with his buddy down in accounts the day before and bumped into the head of the building on the way to the toilets. TheSheriff has had 9 work contacts not to mention everyone he walked by and is now coughing.

Dear HR department, please now advise...

Worse case you have an asymptomatic superspreader eg the post man who delivers post to every desk...

Agreed there are risks and not sure how our facilities will manage things. It'll be a staggered restart.

But the majority of our workforce want to return to the office. We've been running surveys for the last few weeks.

I know friends in other companies seeing the same

JJJackal

I think companies where most people remain in the office 4+ days a week are taking an awful risk - for example in TheSheriffs case there are 400+ people in his office.

The only reason it makes sense for all these to go to the office is if social interaction benefits productivity or is required for good functioning of the company (dont really believe this is the case).

So lets say TheSheriff goes to the office - alot of offices have separate offices for managers etc but often an open floor plan for more junior staff - TheSheriff is a manager in this story and shares the office with one other - TheSheriff goes and speaks to 6 members of staff he supervises on his first day back - trying to maintain social distancing etc etc. On day 2 TheSheriff starts coughing. He has now had contact with the person he shares the office with and at minimum the 6 staff on the floor. He also had lunch with his buddy down in accounts the day before and bumped into the head of the building on the way to the toilets. TheSheriff has had 9 work contacts not to mention everyone he walked by and is now coughing.

Dear HR department, please now advise...

Worse case you have an asymptomatic superspreader eg the post man who delivers post to every desk...

TheSheriff

Assetbacked wrote: »

I haven't been following much of the property market news the past few weeks as I still think it won't be until towards the end of this year for the rental market to drop and for house prices to react to the fallout from covid19, we will be waiting until 12-15 months to just get the initial data. So long as the €350 per week payment is required, schools and universities are in limbo and we still have social distancing in our daily life, the economy will be artificially propped up and the property market is slower to react to economic changes generally.

On the WFH, our office (Dublin 2, 60 people, finance) won't be pivoting to WFH once the crisis abates. However, there is an appetite for the 2 days per week WFH.

We are the same; office of 400+ in D2.

WFH will be one day per week. Was hoping to a bit more flexibility, but not to be.

Ozark707

Assetbacked wrote: »

On the WFH, our office (Dublin 2, 60 people, finance) won't be pivoting to WFH once the crisis abates. However, there is an appetite for the 2 days per week WFH.

The question arising out of this is that if people are allowed to WFH 2 days a week will it cause some people to decide to move from Dublin or not. Unless you could relocate to a commuter town this might be doable but hard to see people relocating to somewhere with a 1.5-2 hr commute if they still have to make it into the office 3 days a week.

JJJackal

Assetbacked wrote: »

I haven't been following much of the property market news the past few weeks as I still think it won't be until towards the end of this year for the rental market to drop and for house prices to react to the fallout from covid19, we will be waiting until 12-15 months to just get the initial data. So long as the €350 per week payment is required, schools and universities are in limbo and we still have social distancing in our daily life, the economy will be artificially propped up and the property market is slower to react to economic changes generally.

On the WFH, our office (Dublin 2, 60 people, finance) won't be pivoting to WFH once the crisis abates. However, there is an appetite for the 2 days per week WFH.

Some people are as productive (or more so) from home
Some people are not

The trick will be getting those who are not back to the office and those who are should stay at home

Assetbacked

I haven't been following much of the property market news the past few weeks as I still think it won't be until towards the end of this year for the rental market to drop and for house prices to react to the fallout from covid19, we will be waiting until 12-15 months to just get the initial data. So long as the €350 per week payment is required, schools and universities are in limbo and we still have social distancing in our daily life, the economy will be artificially propped up and the property market is slower to react to economic changes generally.

On the WFH, our office (Dublin 2, 60 people, finance) won't be pivoting to WFH once the crisis abates. However, there is an appetite for the 2 days per week WFH.

Villa05

awec wrote: »

Who on earth told you this nonsense?

Widespread remote working will be one of the largest factors in driving wages downward, the same as how cost of living is one of the largest factors in driving them upward. If you believe that any savings resulting from reduced capital expenditure by businesses is going to used to prop up wages then I have some snake oil here I'd like to sell you.

Just a note to counteract the argument that WFH will drive wages down

If a process that requires employee buy in leads to higher productivity and lower costs, will employers reduce wages as a result?

If the reactions to WFH are positive by employers and employees during a time when schools and crèches are closed, it would be safe to assume the positivity would increase when they re open

Wages in Ireland are high in comparison to our european neighbours, something that dampens wage inflation and improves quality of life should be welcomed as it improves our competitiveness

Wage inflation driven by increasing and unaffordable accomodation costs is a zero sum game. Its outcome is obvious, job losses and property price crash

Villa05

Brianmwalker wrote: »

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/pension-funds-proposal-for-first-time-buyers-and-reopening-of-hairdressers-coalition-talks-down-to-wire-as-lockdown-lifts-39265825.html

Any thoughts on how the pension fund proposal will impact the market before it comes in to force (if it does at all)? To me looks like damage will drop a little with many waiting for it.
Longer term the government are just propping up the market. If prices fell it would become more affordable for first time buyers

Typical ruling politician response, The issue is that property prices are unaffordable to many people. This measure would add more finance to potentially purchase property further increasing property prices.

Those that find property unaffordable will not have money to put in a pension as they are paying more money on even more unaffordable rents therefore the affordability issue gets worse

Villa05

Interesting debate from 12 months ago on housing and potential solutions to the supply issue with politicians lame excuses to not implementing them, gives alot of credence to schmittel argument that there is an oversupply of actual 3+ bed houses and not enough 1 and 2 bed units.

Came across it when researching the O Cualann model for delivery of affordable housing which claims to be a zero cost to the state of delivering affordable housing. The housing can only be sold within the model so they stay as affordable housing and only rise with the pace of general inflation

Seems a highly workable way to deliver affordable housing.

PommieBast

dwayneshintzy wrote: »

Maybe not, but I've seen something like this advertised which seems decent;

https://touch.daft.ie/for-sale/apartment-188-seven-oaks-sarsfield-road-inchicore-co-dublin/2488717#img=8

Looks like the block of flats that is in the same gated area as Sarsfield medical centre.

https://goo.gl/maps/DJqD7qNn7M6Rvq4B8

theballz

awec wrote: »

Minimum wage in Ireland is like 20k a year.

If someone in IT, a skilled worker, is on as little as 25k a year they are getting absolutely shafted.

IT is very broad. Not a great example.

JimmyVik

JJJackal wrote: »

Least its clear why its 250,000. If bought at that 5.7% return per year.

E1 energy rating. Suspect management fees are high. Might suit a cash buyer. Suppose thats why its cheap on BidX1

100% sure that 250k wont be the final selling price there.

JimmyVik

The_Conductor wrote: »

Whats with the abnormally long lease though? Even a local authority lease- is normally for 10 year period, not longer (as they like to hand it back at that stage- aside from any other factor, it would probably need to be thoroughly redecorated).

10, 15, 20 or 25 years.

The_Conductor

JJJackal wrote: »

There is a 14 year lease LOL

At approx. 50% of the going rate for a 2 bed apartment in D2..........

Villa05

ElBastardo1 wrote:

The fact there is no photos of the inside screams out to me there is more going on behind the scenes. A uncooperative tenant?

This is/was normal for auction properties, at least it was prior in allsops time