Cyrus wrote: » DCC agreeing to buy ? The developer was required by law to sell a certain percentage to the council the same as any other new development. Is marianella in rathgar primarily social housing ? Because it’s the same thing there , is honey park / cualanor in dun laoghaire primarily social housing ?
Timing belt wrote: » I somehow think that funds will have their leases water tight so should be guaranteed income for a long time to come and will probably maintain headline rents because of it ensuring that rent will remain high and off the back of it property valuations.....
PropQueries wrote: » The only reason they’re currently getting the rents they are is because of long-term lease agreements with the council or HAP. Once the state pulls in the purse strings, rents collapse. The lease agreements the current funds have signed up for are most likely watertight but any developer who doesn’t sign up within the next 6 months will be extremely disappointed IMO
Timing belt wrote: » how can rents collapse if long term lease agreements are in place? What you are saying is that they are guaranteed rent from the state for up to 25 years but yet you are saying rent will collapse :eek:
PropQueries wrote: » Those apartments schemes will be 100% social housing within 20 years IMO.
PropQueries wrote: » Tell that to the residents of Marianella. When did they move in again? Almost 50% there already IMO Link to article in Irish Times here: https://www.irishtimes.com/business/construction/residents-of-rathgar-development-engage-planner-to-fight-cairn-homes-plan-1.3737304
Cyrus wrote: » How do you make that out ?
Marius34 wrote: » Yes, in the sense that Government competes with buyers. I think this is obvious to almost everyone here. I'll say finally everyone is right on that part, even the ones who thought about the crash finally got it.
schmittel wrote: » This time last year we were waiting for a change a government. My thoughts on a crash, were largely based on a new Government taking a different approach, policies that were not designed to push up prices, combined with covid. But it is clear the new Government has made more of the same mistakes and I was naive to expect otherwise. I have finally got that!
Hubertj wrote: » The problem is see is the state needs housing immediately. They state is unable to build housing short term to meet that need (irrespective of any current restrictions). The state needs years to build the amount of affordable and social housing it requires. What alternative options does it have short term? Do nothing? So the state has to purchase or lease propoerty in the market. Where else can it purchase? They could CPO the 1 million + vacant units across the country.
schmittel wrote: » To be honest, not a lot of point in trying to discuss your points seriously, if you can't take the vacancy issue seriously!
Hubertj wrote: » Sorry, I should have added “in my opinion”. My opinion is as valid as any other on this thread.
Hubertj wrote: » There are at least 1 million vacant properties around the country. The state should CPO them. Problem solved. They could also Airbnb the spares to raise revenue as I believe many local authorities have serious issues with rent arrears so they could net Airbnb revenue against rent arrears. I’m onto something here
schmittel wrote: » Fair enough, my bad, I assumed you were being facetious and trolling, something you've been banned for before. It's the second time you have referenced the 1m vacants: Now I know you 're being serious, of course your opinion is as valid as any other, and I'd be very interested to discuss it sensibly? So how are you arriving at the figure of 1m vacant properties?
Hubertj wrote: » I’m rounding up and making plenty of assumptions. For example, given that geodirectory relies on anpost to gather data it must be under reported. The post man servicing my area doesn’t seem capable / willing / inclined to carry out his primary task. Are we expected to rely on the same person to collect dat point s for geodirectory? In my opinion.
schmittel wrote: » Still a bit of a leap to get to 1m. I think where we differ is I’m inclined to trust their findings as the best measures available, and assume it is broadly correct.
Hubertj wrote: » There’s loads, we can agree on that, I’m just rounding up. So what about my initial comment. What can state do short term apart from what they are doing?
Marius34 wrote: » Hopefully lessons learned, don't expect much of change from Government. I would rather look at Construction, Supply/Demand & other related economic factors to forecast Property Market.
schmittel wrote: » Yes, that's clear if Government the usual FG or FF led flavour. However if that change of government is SF for example I think we'll see a lot of change.
schmittel wrote: » Scrapping the 4% rent increase caps in RPZs would be a good start.
Marius34 wrote: » So one more lesson needs to learned.
schmittel wrote: » What's that?
Hubertj wrote: » I believe SF are proposing to freeze rents for a number of years. I wonder what impact that might have
Hubertj wrote: » Radio talking about regional price caps for affordable housing scheme. Thoughts on it? Effectively sets the price for the units in each region irrespective of market price? What % of units will be in each region, will it be enough to impact market price? Is there information about how many units or what amount of € is available annually?
