Villa05 wrote: » I think your couple in your sample had a combined income of 80k. Can you tell me what proportion of households have an income of 80k or higher. If the remainder have to be housed and many subsidised by Mr and Mrs average. It is in the interests of the entire population to have sufficient supply in various price points where possible using different housing models that have achieved it elsewhere. If supply is suppressed and housing is provided predominantly by the private market, as night follows day a supply issue leads to an affordability issue That is not my contention and I do not understand why you are associating that ideology with me. seen as I have strongly opposed the state paying silly money for housing units in upmarket areas. You on the other hand seemed passive on the topic, There are alternatives such as co operative housing at a reasonable distance to work Ref A1 rated homes, makes sense to do it when building. The cost could be spread out over a number of years by a tax that matches the savings of having an A1 rated house or better. Simple solution, net zero cost
Yurt! wrote: » Schrödinger's property market according to fliball. A market that is both chronically supply constrained and affordable at the same time. Nobody is talking sea overlooking properties in Howth except you, and asking price does not equal sale price.
awec wrote: Can you post us the link that outlines how DCC are taking calls from estate agents seeking to get them involved in a bidding war?
AlmightyCushion wrote: » Household income includes people in houseshares and people living with their parents. I live in a houseshare. Our household income would be over 100k but individually none of us earn over 80k and if we were buying tomorrow we wouldn't be buying with each other. Same as if I was living with my parents. The household income would be over 80k.
awec wrote: » It's important to distinguish between required remedial works to bring a property up to standard vs optional improvements, which may be worth less to a buyer than they are to you. If there's something wrong with a house that needs fixed you'd usually negotiate that out of the price.
awec wrote: » Can you post us the link that outlines how DCC are taking calls from estate agents seeking to get them involved in a bidding war? The process for selling your gaff to the council is outlined here: https://www.dublincity.ie/residential/housing/i-own-my-home/rent-or-sell-your-property/sell-your-property-us
PropQueries wrote: » Here’s an example from the Irish Times in November 2020: “The house had gone on the market in 2018 for €450,000 but was earlier this year offered for sale for €625,000 despite its condition having deteriorated in the intervening years. The house was also broken into last year and its basement level is now boarded up. It is understood the council paid in the region of €750,000 for the building which could cost more than €1 million to refurbish and convert into homeless accommodation.” So, if I was interested in that property, DCC’s involvement in the bidding process increased its “market value” from €450k to €750k in less than two years. I would have had to offer almost double the “market price” in order to outdid DCC. Even then they would have probably outbid me again. Now apply that to the c. 4,000 properties DCC said they are currently in active negotiations with in the city. Link to Irish Times article here: https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/heritage/se%C3%A1n-o-casey-s-last-dublin-home-bought-by-city-council-to-house-homeless-1.4401169
JimmyVik wrote: » Most people going off to buy a house will be coupling up. So even though their income might be separate now, it will total up to a new household income.
DataDude wrote: » Fair point. Revenue have data from 2018 based on "taxpayer units". Married couples jointly assessed are considered one person essentially. I've just downloaded really quickly and unless I'm doing something stupid (possible!) it would indicate only 5.7% of taxpayer units earn over €80k. Married both couples earning - 8.3% over €80k Married one couple earning - 8.8% over €80k These numbers seem remarkably low to me, but don't have time to investigate further. Maybe another time! EDIT - If you take out the large number in 0-10k bracket (i.e. not working?) then the figures above go to 6.8%, 9.1% and 10.0%. Still seems very low though!https://www.revenue.ie/en/corporate/information-about-revenue/statistics/income-distributions/individualised-gross-income-distributions.aspx
AlmightyCushion wrote: » It still doesn't mean that 22% will have a joint income over 80k.
fliball123 wrote: » How do yo know DCC has pushed it up this far?
PropQueries wrote: » Well if not it raises even more questions. Why then did DCC pay €300k more than what the seller thought was the “market value” in 2018 and €125k more than that same seller thought the “market value” was only a few months beforehand. The only way DCC could justify paying €750k when the advertised asking price was €625k was if another bidder was involved i.e. they outbid a private bidder using taxpayer funds.
Yurt! wrote: » Around the time of the last census I was living in a houseshare with 3 others. For CSO statistical purposes, we comprised a household (and if you look into CSO definitions we would have been reported as such). Our household income would have been reported as (I'd guess) about 200k. That's not an unusual arrangement in Ireland and in Dublin in particular. We have to be careful when presenting household income and overlaying those stats as something evidential about the housing market and affordability.
awec wrote: » I'm sorry, but this is a ridiculous leap of logic. Every single bidder involved increased the end price. DCC was just one. There could have been 5 others. I'm not sure what you're on about when you say "double the market price". The market price is whatever it sells for on the market. In this case it was 750.
awec wrote: » I'm sorry, but this is a ridiculous leap of logic. Every single bidder involved increased the end price. DCC was just one. There could have been 5 others. I'm not sure what you're on about when you say "double the market price". The market price is whatever it sells for on the market, whatever amount someone was willing to pay for it. In this case it was 750. The underbidder could have hit their limit at 740. You are trying to imply if it weren't for DCC this house would have sold for closer to 450. There is absolutely nothing to suggest this is true. IMHO it is a deliberately disingenuous statement to make. You also said that Estate Agents were ringing DCC to get them involved in bidding wars. Again, there is nothing to suggest that this is true.
PropQueries wrote: » Yes and DCC outbid them all. It was DCC that drove that “market price” from €450k to €750k. If DCC wasn’t involved the “market price” would have been much lower. And given that DCC are currently in active negotiations with at least c. 4,000 property owners in the city, that big “demand” you keep telling us is there and driving up prices is actually DCC and not families seeking a home in the city. Once DCC withdraws from the market, that will be a big problem for anyone selling their property IMO
fliball123 wrote: » I am sure you can easily write that off with all of the black market profits being made out there so a sparks/plumber any tradesman say on 40k odd would have a few side gigs going on and have a lot more in their pockets with untaxed work. not to mention teachers/grinds, taxi drivers agreeing a price and not putting the meter on. landlords not declaring rent... ETC
DataDude wrote: » Just wondering here, I have no evidence nor have heard anyone suggest this is possible - If you knew the Council was interested in your property, and you know they have deep pockets, could you have an obliging friend counterbid against the Council to keep pushing things up? Ideally you'd know the Councils limit, but in the absence of that insider knowledge, I wonder could you just have the "other bidder" pull out at the 11th hour and then accept the slightly lower Council offer. At least that way you'd have extracted the maximum value from them. I know the above is borderline tinfoil hat stuff but can't help but feel like a scandal along those lines would be peak Ireland. You could also employ the above tactic in any sale but Council likely to be less price sensitive than most.
Yurt! wrote: » "You know those ratings are flawed Ron Burgundy. They don't take into account houses with more than two television sets...and other things of that nature..."
donnaille wrote: » That would potentially only wipe out 'black market profits' for those not seeking to purchase a house. Some (particularly from my own knowledge those in trades) will likely be declaring as much as possible to have any hope of meeting lending criteria.
JimmyVik wrote: » Economy grew by over 3% last year. House prices are up. Who would have thought that last March?
