2021 Irish Property Market chat - *mod warnings post 1*

Hubertj wrote: »

Do you know many people who did or do buy a property on 1 income? I don’t. My father worked 2 jobs and my mum 1 job so they could buy. I don’t really get people banging on about this point.

I did.

bubblypop wrote: »

Loads of single people buy property?

I’m sure they have. I was asking the question because a number of people have referenced the fact that you need 2 incomes to purchase a property. I don’t really see an issue with that. If someone is able to purchase on their own that’s great for them but there is also nothing wrong if 2 incomes are required.

schmittel wrote: »

That's a tricky question as bubbles can really ony be definitively confirmed in hindsight - ie once it has burst.

However, unsurprisingly there is lots of academic studies on bubbles, for example:



Have we deviated from the fundamental value of house prices?

I think we have, because the price increases have been driven by market manipulations and interventions rather than fundamentals.

By that I mean that some are saying property prices will remain strong because demand will continue to exceed supply - on the face of it solid argument based on fundamentals.

But it ignores the fact that demand will only hold up at current levels if it remains stimulated - eg shared equity schemes - and supply will only remain tight if it remains restricted - eg low turnover, vacancies etc.

So on closer inspection the sound fundamentals argument for current prices is not actually based on sound fundamentals.

Yea but if you cover the bubble in tape and then try to pop it with a pin it deflates much slower, or you can try to inflate it again.

jill_valentine wrote: »

Having to stay in the office is starting to take on something just short of negative connotations as a result - all the prestige work is WFH'able, the dogsbody jobs are for people in office. (Indeed all of my avenues to promotion from my current job mean going full time WFH for at least the next year.)

My experience is anecdata obviously, but it would lead me to think the psychology of 2020-1 Ireland might be at odds of the study done some years ago.

that is your experience, where i am its the executive team that are in all the time, both anecdotal i suppose.

Cyrus wrote: »

A few people alluded to this but this stanford study shows people who wfh full time have much worse promotion prospects.



https://www.irishtimes.com/business/work/think-that-working-from-home-is-here-to-stay-think-again-1.4484553?localLinksEnabled=false&utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=RSS%3AITEM%3ATITLE&utm_campaign=lunchtime_latest_digest

I think there's two problems with the extrapolating the above to the future of Ireland's work habits:

1. It's from 10 years ago. So much has changed since then in terms of technology and so much has changed in terms of societal perception in the last 12 months. I have no doubt an "out of sight out of mind bias" might exist, and there has definitely been a perception in the past that people who requested WFH weren't serious about their careers. Both could be reduced if more senior managers take up the option. Also, have said before on this thread that D&I is quite possibly the single biggest focus of most companies and boards these days. I can easily this WFH promotion bias/discrimination being tied in with this agenda to promote healthy work life balance options to increase female participation at senior levels in the company. Wouldn't it be great if people received promotions based on their output rather than the "lads, lads, lads - pints/GAA" culture that's currently so strong!

2. He's referenced some company in China as his case study. I think it's safe to say that China has a very different (and toxic) work culture compared with Ireland (e.g. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-workers-sleep-idUSKCN0Y12TB)

schmittel wrote: »

I am not proposing anybody volunteers to take an income hit. That’s nonsense. But if it is impossible to build a house for less than (for example) 400k and there is no demand to buy houses at 400k, something has to give.

Either the buyer has to earn more or borrow more or the seller has to earn less.

Well the affordable residential units in Lusk, Co. Dublin start at c. €166k, so it’s not labour costs, construction material costs etc., so it’s definitely land costs and/or developer profit margins

“Ó Cualann Cohousing Alliance, which has built houses in Ballymun for sale to low and middle-income workers starting at €140,000, has been appointed by Fingal County Council to build 51 homes at Dun Emer in Lusk, of which 39 will be affordable purchase homes and 12 will be social housing.

Prices will start from €166,000 for two-bedroom apartments; from €206,000 for three-bedroom duplexes; from €250,000 for three-bedroom terraced houses; and from €258,000 for three-bedroom semi-detached houses.”

Link to Irish Times article on Lusk affordable housing scheme: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/affordable-housing-one-of-state-s-first-schemes-to-be-built-in-lusk-1.4480279?mode=amp

Graham wrote: »

What percentage of the house do the above figures buy?

Good point. Article says we will know in c. 8 weeks. But we do know they will definitely cost less than €200k to design and build if Sisk Living built 90 houses for SDCC for c. €180k each back in 2018. So, yes the buyers will probably still be overcharged whatever the percentage is IMO

Link to Sisk Living article here: https://www.irishbuildingmagazine.ie/2018/11/01/sisk-living-delivers-90-social-houses-in-tallaght/

Graham wrote: »

No, we don't know.

We could guess I suppose but lets not pretend we know.

An educated guess?

schmittel wrote: »

I am not proposing anybody volunteers to take an income hit. That’s nonsense. But if it is impossible to build a house for less than (for example) 400k and there is no demand to buy houses at 400k, something has to give.

Either the buyer has to earn more or borrow more or the seller has to earn less.

unfortunately doesnt look like buyers will earn more money at the moment irish people already are on high wages compared to other european countries

just looked at that debt clock, sure its only going up about five hundred euro a second...

decreds wrote: »

Most of the dating online now is not leading to higher birth rates. I also never implied i had a crystal ball but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that the levels of immigration have dropped substantially and will continue to stay at depressed levels for a few years, at least.

so you know this for a fact that online dating is not leading to a higher birth rate, have you anything to support this?? dating, births, immigration and all other things that have been stifled during covid will return once covid is over. Its like you think people can go traveling willy nilly when they cant at the moment.

poker--addict wrote: »

Please start a separate thread in a separate part of the forum for this. Boring and moving off topic.

If you had followed the discussion it wasn't off topic

fliball123 wrote: »

If you had followed the discussion it wasn't off topic

I did. It reads like two guys sniping at each other hoping to impose their view on each-other. But sure keep it going if it’s constructive to the topic. :rolleyes:

Dating discussion *and* unofficial attempts to moderate the thread can both stop.