brisan wrote: » E already owe 200billion with feck all to show for it Borrow 50billion get the buyers to get the money off the banks through mortgages Rinse and repeat Eventually pay back most of the money Granted 20-30% will probably be social housing with rent coming in but at least the country will have something to show for it. Do you think the under 35-40 yr old living in Mammy’s box room with a PlayStation and Netflix give a toss where the money is coming from You might , I might they certainly don’t
rks wrote: » Kilmainham apartments went to cash buyers - more like investment properties.
The_Conductor wrote: » I know 2 people who bought apartments in Kilmainham in the past 6-7 weeks. Neither of them are investors- one is a civil servant who despite being in her late 30s had not bought previously. The other is an American couple (recently naturalised) who have 2 young special needs kids. I also virtually attended the last BidX1 auction- and bid on one property on behalf of a prospective purchaser (who lost out by 10k). Honestly- it looks like whoever valued the units did a pretty spectacular job- they got the price the market could bear nailed pretty much on the nose. I'm not aware of any investors buying recently- but can think of a long and growing list of people selling at the moment (including various family members- once they get vacant possession of their apartments back).
awec wrote: » They have also been sitting in a state of disrepair for probably at least a decade. Likely they've never been heated. Who knows what problems lurk behind those newly painted walls.
PropQueries wrote: » Maybe in this particular case but I think people seriously underestimate the supply about to enter the market in the very near future. The whole projected future demand for housing in Ireland is based on net migration remaining at c. 30,000 per annum indefinitely i.e. the level of net migration in 2017 and 2018. Given the Coronavirus, net migration in going to a fraction of this over the next five years, if it ever recovers. The increase in net migration between 2017 and 2019 was primarily due to house building taking off and increasing numbers of construction workers coming over due to the mistaken belief there is a shortage of homes in the Irish market. The only reason there was a supply problem between 2013 and 2018 was the investment funds buying up all these properties and keeping them empty (and in many cases evicting existing tenants) until they could sell them. As you can see below, there was literally no real domestic demand/supply problem for housing in Ireland between 2011 and 2016 from the demographic that would be most interested in buying or renting. It fell by c. 72,000. The only explanation left for the so-called shortage of housing is the investment funds buying up all those properties and leaving them empty until they could offload them. Total increase in population 2011 – 2016 was 173,613 as per Census 2016: 0 - 34 Years: -72,493 (yes, minus) 35 - 64 Years: +143,932 65 - 85+ Years: +102,174
bluelamp wrote: » I've no doubt ff/fg will do nothing for affordability, because what actually needs to happen is for them to intentionally cause house prices and rents to fall. They would never do this, even though it would benefit the majority of society going forward. Sinn Fein will sail through the next election. I wont be voting for them, but a part of me will enjoy the drama.
rks wrote: » Investment properties was just my guess. They were cash buyers. At least that's what I was told anyway.
Hubertj wrote: » How many times have you posted this? You must have a file where you copy and paste over and over and over again. Any evidence to support your claim that construction workers are mainly responsible for the net migration figures? Where is the magic over supply of houses? Any evidence? Regarding the population figures did the 0-34 year olds emigrate or did they get older and move into the next age bracket? Are people having less kids now than in the past?
PropQueries wrote: » Well, we went from building 7,826 residential units in the four quarters to Q1 2016 to building c. 21,000 units last year. Over the past four years we have also built office buildings, Grangegorman campus, thousands of student accomodation units etc. It's a fair guess to estimate that the number of construction workers increased dramatically between 2016 and 2019. Given this increase in construction, many of the people working in construction must have been included in the net migration figures. We can also safely assume the net migration will not be c. 30,000 per annum over the next 5 years given that many immigrants work in the hospitality and construction sectors and even if residential construction increased significantly, this demand can be met from workers previously building student accommodation and offices transfering into building residential. If net migration falls to zero (entirely possible and may actually turn negative) over the next 5 years, we may have overestimated the projected increase in the population over the next 5 years by c. 150,000 (30,000*5) or if an average of three persons to a house, by c. 50,000 homes. This doesn't include the 180,000 vacant homes (per Census 2016) or the 90,000 vacant homes (GeoGirectory Survey 2020), take your pick on which one to believe. Many of these vacant homes are owned by investment funds and they're ready to offload them now. Between 2012 and 2016, they bought 90,000 mortgages and €200 billion in property and business loans. We can also see that the domestic population that would be most interested in renting or buying did not increase meaningfully over the past several years to result in a housing demand/supply problem. All this combined leads me to believe there is a significant over-supply problem.
Hubertj wrote: » Ok so all just opinion not supported by facts. Though so. Some questions for you to consider. Given we have a global recession how many Irish people will return to Ireland having lost their jobs in another country? What impact will this have on migration figures? Regarding all the empty homes, how many are in or close to cities or towns? Any evidence they are all owned by funds? I asked these questions the other week when you tried to make the same point but you didn’t answer.
PropQueries wrote: » Well, we went from building 7,826 residential units in the four quarters to Q1 2016 to building c. 21,000 units last year. Over the past four years we have also built office buildings, Grangegorman campus, thousands of student accomodation units etc. It's a fair guess to estimate that the number of construction workers increased dramatically between 2016 and 2019. Given this increase in construction, many of the people working in construction must have been included in the net migration figures. We can also safely assume the net migration will not be c. 30,000 per annum over the next 5 years given that many immigrants work in the hospitality and construction sectors and even if residential construction increased significantly, this demand can be met from workers previously building student accommodation and offices transfering into building residential. If net migration falls to zero (entirely possible and may actually turn negative) over the next 5 years, we may have overestimated the projected increase in the population over the next 5 years by c. 150,000 (30,000*5) or if an average of three persons to a house, by c. 50,000 homes. This doesn't include the 180,000 vacant homes (per Census 2016) or the 90,000 vacant homes (GeoGirectory Survey 2020), take your pick on which one to believe. Many of these vacant homes are owned by investment funds and they're ready to offload them now. Between 2012 and 2016, they bought 90,000 mortgages and €200 billion in property and business loans. We can also see that the domestic population that would be most interested in renting or buying did not increase meaningfully over the past several years to result in a housing demand/supply problem.All this combined leads me to believe there is a significant over-supply problem.
tobsey wrote: » 70% of households are owner occupied. If house prices fall every one of them loses wealth. You could argue that’s it’s not real money unless they are selling but they would fundamentally be worse off if prices fall. You can’t say cheaper housing would benefit the majority because that’s plainly false. It’s a sizeable minority at most. A trend of housing costs increasing faster than wages is bad for society overall, but that doesn’t mean prices falling now is good.
Sorolla wrote: » Trying to sell cottage in the west of Ireland - plenty of enquiries to the estate agent but no real buyers out there Most of those who contact the estate agent want a viewing (just to gawk around the place) but have no interest in buying A lot of time wasters out there
schmittel wrote: » Welcome to the club. Think it's currently just you and me though!
Hubertj wrote: » My son makes great tin foil hats. Oh and care to comment on the facts and data another poster above quoted from Ronan Lyons on Twitter? Is he wrong?
PropQueries wrote: » This is the Central Bank report from December 2019 on net migration and the projections for housing demand going forward. "The paper finds that around 34,000 dwellings would be required per year until the end of the next decade assuming unchanged household formation rates. This scenario is based on net inward migration of 30,000 per annum, a figure in line with the levels of inward migration observed in 2017 and 2018. Assuming a lower level of net inward migration of 10,000 per annum, annual average housing demand is estimated at around 26,500 per annum out to 2030." The projections for housing demand going forward are based on the net migration figures for 2017 and 2018 continuing basically indefinitely. I don't believe these net migration figures will continue, especially in the current environment. If net migration does fall to zero over the next 5 years, we have overestimated the projected increase in the population by 150,000 or c. 50,000 homes if each new home was occupied by an average of 3 persons over the next 5 years. Link to Central Bank report here: https://centralbank.ie/news-media/press-releases/press-release-economic-letter-population-change-and-housing-demand-in-ireland-10-december-2019#:~:text=Today%20the%20Central%20Bank%20of,Thomas%20Conefrey%20and%20David%20Staunton.&text=Assuming%20a%20lower%20level%20of,per%20annum%20out%20to%202030
The_Conductor wrote: » FTB's are considered to be cash buyers I guess- as they aren't part of a chain?
Marius34 wrote: » Do the maths, even if it will have zero migration, based on the same report, Ireland still doesn't have oversupply in the matter of residential construction.
PropQueries wrote: » As per below census 2016, there’s no future demand from the domestic population. All projected housing demand is based on their net migration projections and they still didn’t include the 90,000 vacant homes (Geodirectory survey 2020 or 180,000 vacant homes as per census 2016, take your pick) just sitting there waiting to re-enter the market. They assume they don’t exist, will disappear or the investment funds who own many of them will not allow them to ever re-enter the market. Total increase in population 2011 – 2016 was 173,613 as per Census 2016: 0 - 34 Years: -72,493 (yes, minus) 35 - 64 Years: +143,932 65 - 85+ Years: +102,174
schmittel wrote: » What jumps out at me from Ronan Lyons graph is that as far as Dublin is concerned it rather weakens the argument that 2007/8 was a problem of massive oversupply and this time it is different.
Marius34 wrote: » Highlighted is purely your assumptions, that has nothing todo with fact, nor with the provided report. 90.000 of empty building, that's slightly below 5%, which is very healthy and absolutely normal in any part of the world. Most of this probably are rural old & cold homes. Even today you can find many houses below 50K, but they are most difficult to sell, with no demands.
Hubertj wrote: » What do you mean? There wasn’t an oversupply in Dublin last crash but there is this time? Did people argue there was oversupply in Dublin? I thought “ghost estates” were mainly away from cities and larger towns and that’s why they were never finished?
PropQueries wrote: » Number of vacant homes in England is 216,000 and they have over ten times our population. Link to guardian article here: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/mar/11/empty-homes-england-rises-property The over supply problem from the Celtic tiger years hasn’t gone away you know Basically, the future of the housing market depends on when the investment funds who own many of these vacant homes in Ireland decide to pull the trigger. And I believe it will be sooner rather than later.
schmittel wrote: » What I mean is that is in the past whenever I have posted that one of the reasons I think property will fall in the near term is that the problems are as bad, if not worse, than the last time. This is generally met with posters saying I am wrong because the big problem last time was a massive oversupply, and that is not the case this time. Ronan Lyons' graph says that this is not the case as far as Dublin is concerned. But you are right in as far as I don't recall anybody arguing there were ghost estates in Dublin. But Dublin prices crashed nonetheless. Lyons' data does nothing to dissuade me from my long term oversupply belief. I have posted numerous times that I think (for various reasons that I have spelt out in detail) if we build 30k houses a year for the next decade we will cause a massive oversupply problem. Some sources have even talked of 50k+ a year. And every time I post it people say that's nonsense here look at this data - eg Ronan Lyons and his houses built since the war - or nonsense just look at the market right now. But my argument is forward looking, so how many houses we have built since the war or what the market is doing right now, today, is not a credible argument against my theory. Indeed, these responses only serve to reinforce my belief, that by not looking forward people are clamouring to build large quantities of houses to solve what is a temporary problem. Longer term we will end up with too many of the wrong type houses.
