Springy Turf wrote: » Sure, you might have people in their 20s, happy to live with their parents for 1-2 years while the dust hopefully settles. That's assuming the current uncertainty is over in a year or two, and you can get the credit you need to beat cash purchasers / value investors to the punch. But that is just one set of circumstances - what about the others I mentioned?
AlmightyCushion wrote: » You can only borrow 140k on a 40k income.
MacronvFrugals wrote: » Must have been tough competing with IRES back then lol
brisan wrote: » As a 4th year apprentice I earned about 5k a year. 4th year apprentice now earns about 40k Thats inflation as is house prices We needed a lot more than 10% deposit and paid more of our weekly income in repayments We paid a little more than half my monthly salary on mortgage ie 295 a month (Thats qualified wages ) Thats the equivalent of a 4th year apprentice paying about 1500 a month now That will get you a 400k mortgage ,so that plus your deposit will buy a decent house anywhere in the country
Pelezico wrote: » Why is it not free or nearly free? There are a lot of costs to owning a property including maintenance, insurance, and interest costs. If someone can live with their parents fir a year or two they would be unwise to buy now. My son was gazumped in February on a small two bed in Dublin. How lucky he was not to be successful. Now he is staying at home and with the girlfriend, hopefully for a year.. maybe two. He can save and watch his preferred property fall at the same time. It is a double whammy of saving. I feel like sending the buyer of that property a small gift as appreciation for the get out of jail card.
Akesh wrote: » Some people really don't understand inflation... Imagine writing that post you quoted thinking you were making a valid point :eek:
Springy Turf wrote: » The thing is, the decision to buy is not as simple as whether or not it will be cheaper. People need to consider: - Will they have access to a mortgage this time next year to be able to take advantage of a price drop - What is the financial cost of waiting (Rent vs drop in house value) - Will they have to stay in their current job so that they are eligible for a mortgage when they want to buy - Do they have children that they want to start in a local school where they want to buy - Is the price likely to drop significantly at their price point (i.e. there might be a 20% drop on million euro houses, and a 5% drop on 300,000 euro houses). - How difficult is their current living situation - Is it possible they will lose enough equity in their current house to leave them without enough for a deposit on their next house. It's seems pretty much certain there will be a drop in price. When that happens and by how much is the question. And waiting for the price drop is not free.
awec wrote: » How many 4th year apprentices do you think can buy 3 bed semi's today?
JimmyVik wrote: » Same people saying prices are going to go down dont buy now, were saying the same thing then.Same people saying buy because prices are going to go up, were saying the same thing then too. You should read them. They are excellent. And just go to show you the reasons that we all think things are going to happen, dont actually turn out to be the reasons, even if they do happen. Make you realize that myself and everyone else who give a prediction, is only guessing at the end of the day. But you would think some are economists, psychic even, the way they are so cock sure that they are right with their predictions. If they are that good, none of them will be posting here in 5 years. They will be using that skill and sipping Martinis in Barbados with their riches from such skill
Iceman29 wrote: » So just to be totally clear......these people were actually correct in 08/09?
JimmyVik wrote: » Same people saying prices are going to go down dont buy now, were saying the same thing then. Same people saying buy because prices are going to go up, were saying the same thing then too. You should read them. They are excellent. And just go to show you the reasons that we all think things are going to happen, dont actually turn out to be the reasons, even if they do happen. Make you realize that myself and everyone else who give a prediction, is only guessing at the end of the day. But you would think some are economists, psychic even, the way they are so cock sure that they are right with their predictions. If they are that good, none of them will be posting here in 5 years. They will be using that skill and sipping Martinis in Barbados with their riches from such skill
yosser hughes wrote: » There are a lot of bank staff who got burned with property investments and also bank shares, a double whammy. Many are just not in a good position at all as a result. The ones who were in a good position have already availed of previous VR offers after 2008
beauf wrote: » I thought banks had largely already culled staff and reduced staff in branches and reduced branches before all this anyway.
Plans for initial job reductions this year have been paused, even as rival Bank of Ireland announced on Tuesday that it has opened up a voluntary severance programme under its aim to cut more than 1,400 jobs over the coming years. “While our strategic priorities and medium-term financial targets remain unchanged, the challenge to achieve these is greater as a direct result of the COVID-19 health crisis,” AIB said on Thursday. “We are considering the future shape of our business in order to adjust to the financial impact of COVID-19 and equally to examine the opportunities presented by the crisis, namely, the acceleration of themes such as digitisation, flexible working and sustainability, so that AIB maintains a strong and resilient balance sheet, generates sustainable profits and returns capital to shareholders.”
awec wrote: » Do you think they'll get the 1400? The fact they're going with a voluntary stage suggests that they believe there's enough staff ready and willing to jump.
Pelezico wrote: » Brendan did not allow any discussion about house prices on his forum. He must have had a shed load of property.
awec wrote: » It's a fairly important distinction to make. Contract workers are only ever supposed to be temporary (that's the whole point) and will always be the first out the door when costs need cut. They get paid more because they carry the risk of having no contract and therefore no income. Higher risk, higher reward.
Bass Reeves wrote: » It would be especially attractive to older staff who came in under the old Bank clerk recruitment from school. I think the retirement age for these was 60. Another factor is if you have worked that long with an employer the redundancy tax free allowance is very generous. If the taxable part was paid in 2021 an employee's on 70k+ could walk away with 150k+.
Hulk Hands wrote: » I'd have to ask but id imagine so, and thats with it not being open to everyone (younger well regarded types might/will have it refused). Plenty of grey in there. Yeah, 4 weeks + the 2 statutory and a new upper limit of 2.5x salary.
Donald Trump wrote: » Actually, technically that (subprime) point was correct, even though he was wrong on virtually everything else. (including the regulation part) The US crisis was predicated on the back of structured products which repackaged loans that were known to be junk individually. Those were not a feature of the Irish crisis, although you could perhaps argue that similar valuation mistakes were done on loan books in the Irish banks by regulators and the banks themselves
awec wrote: » It matters to everyone, because "Company X ends contract of 1400 contractors" is a very different situation to "Company X cuts 1400 permanent jobs". Contractors knowingly take the risk of having no income at any stage. That's why they get paid a premium, they are supposed to be able to cover themselves when they are not currently in contract. Contractor roles can just disappear even in the good times, it's the very nature of the work. Neither are good news, but there is a big difference between the two scenarios.
