2021 Irish Property Market chat - mod warnings post 1

JimmyVik wrote: »

What they needed was a great property crash.

They would've, only for the Chinese propping them up in post 2008 with massive capital infrastructure programs

thefridge2006 wrote: »

Cairn Homes sells 150 homes to cuckoo fund as it reports profit of €24m

https://www.independent.ie/business/commercial-property/cairn-homes-sells-150-homes-to-cuckoo-fund-as-it-reports-profit-of-24m-39963495.html

"The company said its sales mix in 2020 was more oriented towards housing compared to previous years and that it reduced its average selling price to €332,000 – excluding VAT – from €372,000 in 2019."

Will all these be rented going forward?

MacronvFrugals wrote: »

Will all these be rented going forward?

First few paragraphs of the article

Listed builder Cairn Homes has sold 150 homes in Lucan, county Dublin to Irish investment management firm Carysfort Capital and Wall Street financial giant Angelo Gordon for €48.6m.

The homes, which have yet to be completed, will then be rented out once finished.

Bass Reeves

Browney7 wrote: »

The build cost for DCC was ignoring land costs I believe

If it was it another reason why no LA should be allowed to build houses. I be surprised if they did not include a site price. Did they include other non direct building costs such as utilities, legal design finance etc

Cyrus wrote: »

First few paragraphs of the article

Listed builder Cairn Homes has sold 150 homes in Lucan, county Dublin to Irish investment management firm Carysfort Capital and Wall Street financial giant Angelo Gordon for €48.6m.

The homes, which have yet to be completed, will then be rented out once finished.

Thanks Cy, i assume also they wouldn't be paying the amount of tax that a small landlord would?

MacronvFrugals wrote: »

Thanks Cy, i assume also they wouldn't be paying the amount of tax that a small landlord would?

nothing surer :P

MacronvFrugals wrote: »

Does anyone know if we've got updated Eurostat figures like the ones mentioned in this article?

Jump in young Irish adults living with parents among highest in EU

"Rate of people aged 25-29 living at home up 11.2 points to 47.2% in decade to 2017"

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/jump-in-young-irish-adults-living-with-parents-among-highest-in-eu-1.4177848?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fsocial-affairs%2Fjump-in-young-irish-adults-living-with-parents-among-highest-in-eu-1.4177848

The Data being referred to in the article comes from this Eurofound page

And the source of the data that Eurofound use EU-SILC 2017 which is the EUROPEAN UNION STATISTICS ON INCOME AND LIVING CONDITIONS (EU-SILC)

The specific table that contains the data can be found here

This is exactly the same data that I shared yesterday when I was looking at the age rage 18-34 and the report is looking at a subset of this data.

If you look at this data it tells you that as % more 25-29 year olds are living with there parents due to the housing problems when you compare 2007-2017

If I recut my data for just 25-29 it is the same data in the news article but shows that the actual number of people in the age bracket of 25-29 living at home has not significantly changed in the past 15 years.

fliball123

Idbatterim wrote: »

not having a property tax, is a joke! Did or do we let people in massive engine cars, driver around with as good as free motor tax... no! The home is way more emotive, they wont touch it here. it just absolutely screws over the non homeowners, remember all decision makers are homeowners, they dont even have to be landlords to want rip off prices!

If you guys have time and are interested in why governments support rip off prices, take a look at this Australian documentary on the subject, it is excellent!

No bother paying higher property tax providing the government take its foot off the neck of workers with regard to income tax. The problem is that the pool of people who are paying over the odds for income tax would be caught with this as well

MacronvFrugals wrote: »

Will all these be rented going forward?

yes more than likely and we will see a lot more of this over the next year or so. Even if we end up with a oversupply of properties to rent investors will still be interested as they won't find a yield like that anywhere on the market.

If I recut my data for just 25-29 it is the same data in the news article but shows that the actual number of people in the age bracket of 25-29 living at home has not significantly changed in the past 15 years.

Very interesting thanks for posting.

fliball123 wrote: »

No bother paying higher property tax providing the government take its foot off the neck of workers with regard to income tax. The problem is that the pool of people who are paying over the odds for income tax would be caught with this as well

The issue is the older generation that will be on a fixed income from their pension but may own a valuable property. It is the same discussion we had yesterday regarding older people downsizing.

I have no issue with a property tax as long as it will thought out and implemented as part of a bigger strategy like we were discussing yesterday. If it not then it won't be an equitable tax or everyone.

hometruths

Timing belt wrote: »

If I recut my data for just 25-29 it is the same data in the news article but shows that the actual number of people in the age bracket of 25-29 living at home has not significantly changed in the past 15 years.

That is also slightly different to what the media reports have been telling us.

Villa05

Timing belt wrote:

If I recut my data for just 25-29 it is the same data in the news article but shows that the actual number of people in the age bracket of 25-29 living at home has not significantly changed in the past 15 years.

The property market has been consistently dysfunctional in those 15 years.

The pain of it has been consistently placed on the shoulders of that age group

Not really surprising is it

Folks quick one, the new shared equity loan scheme i know all the details haven't been fleshed out but just looking at myhome.ie there is only 12 listings for new homes in Dublin for under 400k, we'd assume once the scheme comes online these existing listings will snapped up quicker than the Healy Raes buying property at an Allsops auction.

So is the intent just to spur on building or is there lots of new developments nearly finished and ready for sale?

Dwarf.Shortage

MacronvFrugals wrote: »

Folks quick one, the new shared equity loan scheme i know all the details haven't been fleshed out but just looking at myhome.ie there is only 12 listings for new homes in Dublin for under 400k, we'd assume once the scheme comes online these existing listings will snapped up quicker than the Healy Raes buying property at an Allsops auction.

So is the intent just to spur on building or is there lots of new developments nearly finished and ready for sale?

The intent appears to be to give the large pool of buyers higher nominal spending power so they can fight over the same pool of house and the highest earners will ultimately still win that battle, just at much higher nominal prices.

MacronvFrugals wrote: »

Folks quick one, the new shared equity loan scheme i know all the details haven't been fleshed out but just looking at myhome.ie there is only 12 listings for new homes in Dublin for under 400k, we'd assume once the scheme comes online these existing listings will snapped up quicker than the Healy Raes buying property at an Allsops auction.

So is the intent just to spur on building or is there lots of new developments nearly finished and ready for sale?

In the UK the scheme only applies to certain new properties under a certain price.

I imagine they will implement similar here so the 12 houses you are looking at may not even be eligible if the scheme even though they are within the price range.

thomas 123

MacronvFrugals wrote: »

Folks quick one, the new shared equity loan scheme i know all the details haven't been fleshed out but just looking at myhome.ie there is only 12 listings for new homes in Dublin for under 400k, we'd assume once the scheme comes online these existing listings will snapped up quicker than the Healy Raes buying property at an Allsops auction.

So is the intent just to spur on building or is there lots of new developments nearly finished and ready for sale?

Martin said in the dail today that there may be caps, not sure if I misheard but it will be great for self builds and new buys if there is some sort of cap.

thomas 123 wrote: »

Martin said in the dail today that there may be caps, not sure if I misheard but it will be great for self builds and new buys if there is some sort of cap.

You are right they did say there will be caps

Timing belt wrote: »

You are right they did say there will be caps

When you say caps do you mean like income caps for the applicant?

In the UK the scheme only applies to certain new properties under a certain price.

I imagine they will implement similar here so the 12 houses you are looking at may not even be eligible if the scheme even though they are within the price range.

With the UK scheme what makes a new home eligible or not besides the market value being under a certain amount?

PropQueries

PropQueries wrote: »

In the Irish Times on the 6th January, Brendan Kenny, Deputy Chief Executive of Dublin City Council stated the following:

"We cannot build a unit in Dublin for €300,000, no way. The average cost is more than €400,000. The schemes we are building at the moment, the big ones in the city, the average costs are €430,000 per unit."

At the moment, in Castlebar, A2 rated 119sq.m. 3 bed semi-detached houses are being advertised for €243,500.

I use an A2 rated example as I think this has to be the standard going forward. There are plenty of A3 rated units currently for sale for less and much closer to Dublin.

Can anyone reconcile the difference in cost in delivering similar sized A2-rated houses in Dublin given that site costs and labour costs do not appear to make up the c. €180,000 difference in costs between Dublin and the rest of the country even if the council had to pay market rates for the sites they build on, pay market level finance costs and had to make the industry standard profit margin.

Link to Irish Times article here: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/affordable-housing-subsidy-must-double-for-dublin-housing-chief-says-1.4451582

Link to the Castlebar A2-rated 3 bed semi-detached units for sale here: https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/the-clydagh-carrabeag-newport-road-castlebar-co-mayo/4470500

Just to follow up on this. Today on RTE, it was reported that: "Cairn Homes said its 2020 sales mix was heavily biased towards starter homes which had an average VAT inclusive selling price of €354,000".

How would people reconcile the c. €75,000 difference between Dublin City Council stating that their "average costs are €430,000 per unit" with the average selling prices (including VAT) figures published today by Cairn Homes for 2020, especially since most of Cairn Homes new build units are in the Greater Dublin region.

To put this price difference in perspective, it's almost the cost of purchasing two brand new Lexus cars (Model UX 250h) for the occupiers of each new unit built by Dublin City Council.

Link to Cairn Homes article today on rte here: https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0113/1189381-cairn-homes-trading-update/

Link to brand new Lexus cars for sale in Dublin: https://www.lexus.ie/car-models/ux/prices-and-specs/

Idbatterim

fliball123 wrote: »

No bother paying higher property tax providing the government take its foot off the neck of workers with regard to income tax. The problem is that the pool of people who are paying over the odds for income tax would be caught with this as well

100%! Even low income workers here, actually the working poor, are hit with a 50% marginal rate over a pittance of an income, as if they were the wolf of wall street, when they can barely keep the wolf from the door financially. the country is a joke. My company, the employees would turn down extra hours, at good pay,because they werent prepared to lose 50% of it, and they were right! and they were getting generous pay!

The taxation system here is comedy beyond belief, basically its a small amount paying in, far, far higher than their fair share!

JimmyVik

Idbatterim wrote: »

100%! Even low income workers here, actually the working poor, are hit with a 50% marginal rate over a pittance of an income, as if they were the wolf of wall street, when they can barely keep the wolf from the door financially. the country is a joke. My company, the employees would turn down extra hours, at good pay,because they werent prepared to lose 50% of it, and they were right! and they were getting generous pay!

The taxation system here is comedy beyond belief, basically its a small amount paying in, far, far higher than their fair share!

I dont do overtime anymore now.
Only getting to keep half of it grinds on me. Its not worth the effort.

PropQueries

Idbatterim wrote: »

100%! Even low income workers here, actually the working poor, are hit with a 50% marginal rate over a pittance of an income, as if they were the wolf of wall street, when they can barely keep the wolf from the door financially. the country is a joke. My company, the employees would turn down extra hours, at good pay,because they werent prepared to lose 50% of it, and they were right! and they were getting generous pay!

The taxation system here is comedy beyond belief, basically its a small amount paying in, far, far higher than their fair share!

And it will most likely get worse. Just last month RTE reported "Leo Varadkar has called for a "grown-up conversation" on increasing Employers' and Employees' PRSI to fund a reformed social insurance system, including income-linked unemployment benefits."

It does beg the question, in my mind anyway, where all this borrowed money (c. €40 billion between 2020 and 2021?) is actually going given that the PUP payments are being primarily funded through the raiding of the c. €5 billion surplus that was in the PRSI fund back in March 2020.

Link to article on RTE here: https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/1123/1180017-low-pay-prsi/

PropQueries wrote: »

And it will most likely get worse. Just last month RTE reported "Leo Varadkar has called for a "grown-up conversation" on increasing Employers' and Employees' PRSI to fund a reformed social insurance system, including income-linked unemployment benefits."

It does beg the question, in my mind anyway, where all this borrowed money (c. €40 billion between 2020 and 2021?) is actually going given that the PUP payments are being primarily funded through the raiding of the c. €5 billion surplus that was in the PRSI fund back in March 2020.

Link to article on RTE here: https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/1123/1180017-low-pay-prsi/

They have enough wriggle room have only allocated 8.5bn to Other.

PropQueries wrote: »

Just to follow up on this. Today on RTE, it was reported that: "Cairn Homes said its 2020 sales mix was heavily biased towards starter homes which had an average VAT inclusive selling price of €354,000".

How would people reconcile the c. €75,000 difference between Dublin City Council stating that their "average costs are €430,000 per unit" with the average selling prices (including VAT) figures published today by Cairn Homes for 2020, especially since most of Cairn Homes new build units are in the Greater Dublin region.

To put this price difference in perspective, it's almost the cost of purchasing two brand new Lexus cars (Model UX 250h) for the occupiers of each new unit built by Dublin City Council.

Link to Cairn Homes article today on rte here: https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0113/1189381-cairn-homes-trading-update/

Link to brand new Lexus cars for sale in Dublin: https://www.lexus.ie/car-models/ux/prices-and-specs/

The Lexus stuff is a nice touch , completely irrelevant but a new quirk

Anyway , I’m not sure what you want here. How can anyone reconcile these figures for you without being privy to the detailed data , do you think DCC are making it up?

We are already relying on the private sector for social housing and don’t seem to be getting any bargains (700k in sheriff st anyone ).

mcsean2163

JimmyVik wrote: »

I dont do overtime anymore now.
Only getting to keep half of it grinds on me. Its not worth the effort.

I think that's crazy. If you work overtime and get 1.5 time you get to keep .75 on top of your normal wage. Anything extra you can put aside is massive and can toward a nest egg or whatever.

I could never understand that logic.

PropQueries

Cyrus wrote: »

The Lexus stuff is a nice touch , completely irrelevant but a new quirk

Anyway , I’m not sure what you want here. How can anyone reconcile these figures for you without being privy to the detailed data , do you think DCC are making it up?

We are already relying on the private sector for social housing and don’t seem to be getting any bargains (700k in sheriff st anyone ).

I suppose the question I would be asking is why building contractors appear to be charging DCC double the price they are willing to provide the same work to the likes of Cairn Homes for.

It also matters in the sense that DCC should be able to supply twice the number the houses if they got the same deal e.g. Cairn Homes appears to be negotiating.

amacca

mcsean2163 wrote: »

I think that's crazy. If you work overtime and get 1.5 time you get to keep .75 on top of your normal wage. Anything extra you can put aside is massive and can toward a nest egg or whatever.

I could never understand that logic.

Some people don't like what they perceive to be unfair and will disengage when they can

Others look at their hourly rate and then compare that to the per hour rate for overtime and think ots not worth it to them to earn less for what is time on top of your normal working week......to some people that time, spent with family or loved ones or doing something you like to do is worth more than the heavily taxed overtime rate (assuming it puts you over a threshold)....in the long run they could be right a balance is better for tour health than constantly chasing d8minish8ng returns......look at it this way will you regret not doing overtime on your deathbed or the opportunity cost of doing the overtime (if you do too much of it of course)

Others couldn't give a fook about overtime as they have a little nixer (that perhaps couldn't be their fulltime gig) that pays much more per hour than the overtime would as it's under the counter money so they are making a purely economic decision (assuming not doing the overtime isn't going to cost a promotion or the job itself is not one they want to get promoted in anyway)

PropQueries wrote: »

I suppose the question I would be asking is why building contractors appear to be charging DCC double the price they are willing to provide the same work to the likes of Cairn Homes for.

It also matters in the sense that DCC should be able to supply twice the number the houses if they got the same deal e.g. Cairn Homes appears to be negotiating.

Fine

But you are asking the wrong people in the wrong place .