Hubertj wrote: » I'm very surprised that someone with too much time on their hands hasn't investigated this. We all know of vacant units in the ovepriced developments in Grand Canal and Ballsbridge. So even if CSO is way off for various reasons, lets say 100k "Vacant units". It must be pretty difficult to hide that many. Why hasn't some PBP clown done a Sherlock on it?
PropQueries wrote: » As I already said: "We would only find out how much if such a tax (without loopholes) was introduced as international funds still like to stay on the right side of the law. Yes, I used 'maybe' as those purchases made between 2012 and 2016 are still shrouded in secrecy."
fliball123 wrote: » Yet they still dont understand supply vs demand = price I have accepted that demand may come down but it will have to keep pace with the supply side to see any drops in price.
fliball123 wrote: » As in if I have 10 apples and 10 people want to buy then the price is set, if 5 people no longer want an apple then the price drops but if we take 5 apples out then the price reset to what it was.
fliball123 wrote: » 9/10 months on and still no price drop. Yet schmittle will come on and with no proof say prices are dropping even do both CSO and PPR confirms he is full of hot air.
Marius34 wrote: » You said previously that it easily with solve Census vacancy problem, but on other side you have no any knowledge or read anywhere about those funds vacancy. I'm confident those type of Census checks will always be very high, as the history tells. Is GeoDirectory vacancy wrong, since its massively difference from CSO census?
cnocbui wrote: » I would have thought that collating data from energy providers would be one way to investigate this empty property phenomenon.
Marius34 wrote: » I would think the same, but it seems it's works in opposite, many companies including Energy companies using their data. It's quite new, but it's getting popular for companies as source data for Residential and Commercial properties.
schmittel wrote: » You sure nailed apples, but in the context of a housing market you have a bit of a struggle understanding supply and demand yourself. According this year on year to end of September, national prices and Dublin prices are lowerhttps://bl.ocks.org/pinsterdev/raw/98d5baa18a1bc6d603e0/ I may well be full of hot air, but neither you or the PPR are confirming it. As for the CSO, you can't trust a thing they say, rudimentary amateurs.
PropQueries wrote: » Well, whether it's c. 180,000 in Q2 2016 as per Census 2016 or c. 90,000 in Q2 2020 as per the GeoDirectory survey as you mentioned. Either way, if I was investing in property, I would like to know who owns them.
fliball123 wrote: » You don't understand anything you keep telling people not to buy due to the innate want you have for prices to drop for months now you have been spouting prices have dropped during the recession and used a drop in an asking price here and there to back up your dumb ass theories I have put up the CSO and PPR data over and over and do I need to do it again to prove you wrong. I have always said prices may drop and I am on record here as saying I think they will drop by about 5% or so in the next 18 months or so but the difference between you and me and even if I am wrong in my assumptions of prices going up or down I have never gone out of my way to tell a poster on here to buy or not buy. As for apples when I am dealing with someone who has a lesser intellect I feel like I have to explain it to you like your a 5 year old.
schmittel wrote: » All of the above is verifiably false. Except for the comment that I have a lesser intellect than you. It's not verifiable from what we have posted on here, but of course that's possible. I couldn't possibly comment.
fliball123 wrote: » Your starting to sound like trump there fake news your the comical Ali of boards. Sure if anyone wants to have a look at your vested interest and the amount of times you were proven wrong on price drops all they have to do is look back at your posts and see how many times you were corrected by other posters who had actual fact backing up their claims
fliball123 wrote: » You don't understand anything you keep telling people not to buy due to the innate want you have for prices to drop for months now you have been spouting prices have dropped during the recession and used a drop in an asking price here and there to back up your dumb ass theories I have put up the CSO and PPR data over and over and do I need to do it again to prove you wrong.
Marius34 wrote: » over 90.000 in difference! So you don't know if its Census right or GeoDirectory, but you keep sharing Census as a factual numbers? Over 90.000, not big deal, as long as it's large number, it suits you?
Timing belt wrote: » WFH may not an option for most of these properties due to very poor WIFI connections.
PropQueries wrote: » The states program for connecting every home in the country to fast broadband is actually progressing a lot faster than many people believe. Every home will be connected within the next 7 years and they're already further along than many people realise.
MacronvFrugals wrote: » You've more faith in this than me, they're cheaping out on some aspects which could cause bandwidth issues especially with more users than expected.
cnocbui wrote: » Such as? Australia recently screwed the pooch totally in this regard, but I am not aware of Ireland getting it wrong.
MacronvFrugals wrote: » From what i understand they're relying on cellular for a decent part of it when imo it should be all fibre. Then theres the ownership structure which is meh to say the least, we're paying all this money and wont even own the infra.
Hubertj wrote: » I don't think wireless is being considered due to the densification requirements to make it work. I may be open to correction on this but i believe the wireless suggestion was also rejected due to the 5g link to Covid. Added to that, the possibility of using Microsoft Data Centres for Telco cloud was a no go considering Bill Gates being responsible for the development of the virus
Pelezico wrote: » This surely evidence of a strong housing market. Remarkable in the face of the deepest recession of tge last 100 years.
PropQueries wrote: » The same report states "However, we estimate transaction volumes through July and August were still down 37%" compared to Q3 2019.
Mic 1972 wrote: » Prices kept going up even with less buyers and less bidders. That means strong confidence
PropQueries wrote: » IRES REIT is the primary one who is public and must inform investors of vacancy rates. But, they have mastered the art of renting to the state. There was a documentary on RTE about one of their new built housing estates in Dublin 15 a couple of years ago if anyone can find the link to it. I think nearly all were rented to the state at c. €2,400 per month and the tenants were shocked when they learned of the rent. It was an interesting watch at the time.
MacronvFrugals wrote: » Thanks Hub i thought the cellular to fill gaps was still on the table, are they going with fibre>copper to the last mile?
The_Conductor wrote: » If that is the case- it would seem that the State is the one paying top dollar for rental properties- and is actively setting the standard for all private sector tenants. I sincerely hope that if this is the case- that the State cops the hell on, and pays a more reasonable rate- so rents float downwards for ordinary tenants who actually pay their own rent.
