Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Irish Property Market chat II - *read mod note post #1 before posting*

Options
1514515517519520951

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 996 ✭✭✭Ozark707



    At least the loan amounts were not so bad in the mid nineties. A jacking up of rates now will cause a whole deal of hurt. Incredible to see how the rate rises are playing out in some other countries.


    35% of Canadian homeowners say they can handle the current benchmark rate of 4.5% for an average of <10 months before they would be forced to sell/vacate their homes. "If even a small fraction of those sell, Canadian housing is going to have a bad time

    https://twitter.com/AvidCommentator/status/1621305236588748800



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    Loans weren’t as big in the 90’s and neither were wages….it’s all relative!!!!

    you also need to remember that rate rises won’t impact all mortgage holders the same and the fact that LTV’s on the overall bank books implies that there are a lot of mortgage holders where rate rises will have a reduced impact on them. Also the trend of a reduction in overall mortgage book size as more mortgages are repaid than issued also indicates that the same.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 22,705 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    Different countries different structures. A lot of them were 4.5+X income. There was a near riot when we moved to 4X and our max is 4.5X. The UK is 4X and 6X max. I am sure about Canadian rules but is it similar to the US where loans are non recourse.

    In Ireland you have to stop paying for a bank to repossess and that is a 5year process. If you go into a bank if you are in trouble they will be more than willing to allow you to reduce payment.

    Discressonary spending is the problem in this country. People think that no matter how much the coffee, takeaway, car service, diesel, eating out goes up by you are entitled to it.

    At present this is not a recession.. local pubs have dropped the pint of Coors by 50c/pint. There was obviously resistance to the price increase.

    Just thing about it a chicken roll is gone to 5+, a takeaway is 10+, a Chinese is nearly 15, a burger in a restaurant is 15+, a starter or desert is 8+.

    A recession sorts the men out from the boys. You restructure your spending. It will take the top off building costs but you will not see prices collapse. With a 10%+ equity in the game you will not walk away.

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,325 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    The only buyers who benefit from increasing rates are cash buyers. Anyone waiting on a house price correction should not cheer interest rate rises as its ultimately a 0 sum game.


    What about buyers who bought similar in 2007 vs say 2014?

    Had they the same repayments in 2022?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,095 ✭✭✭Villa05


    You can feel the frustration of this uk based CNN presenter when he declares his mortgage repayments have doubled in 8 months. I'm amazed at the naivety of those on the front lines of business. How were they so blind to what was coming? Is this group think all over again




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 22,705 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    A person who bought in 2007 might not have got a mortgage in 2014. A lot of people buying from 2012-2015 had substantial cash savings. The person who bough in 2007 is better off than the person who could not buy in this period and who failed to buy since.

    99% of people are better of because they bought a house no matter when they bought it

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,095 ✭✭✭Villa05


    99% of people are better of because they bought a house no matter when they bought it

    Highly questionable stat considering the tripe that was built during the celtic tiger and the cost of buying and remedies



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 270 ✭✭tom_murphy112


    I would say claiming we are bankrupt is extreme. But at the same time, we have been having some great tax revenues from Corporations. We are spending every penny that we earn, very little has been put to long term projects like building social housing. But rather has moved to leasing which is going to cost the state the same money during good time and bad times.

    The idea that we will always have this great cash flow from corporation is just but a dream, when this stops the state will have to cut cost (as it happened during the last crash) and/or increase taxes for the ordinary citizen (as it happened during the last crash)

    Also your assertion that we should be using GDP as it looks better is not valid in the Irish context - https://www.politico.eu/article/ireland-gdp-growth-multinationals-misleading/



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,325 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 586 ✭✭✭theboringfox


    Rate rises won't affect cash buyers or people who were looking to have mortgages well within means. It will hit those seeking to go to full 3.5x and more.

    If you take it a 5 year fix might cost 2% more than last year. Then over 5 year period on say 400k mortgage (buying 500k house at 80% loan to value) thats 8k pa and 40k over the term of 5 year fix more they are paying vs same 5 year fix last year. So for buyer to be in same position financially as prior year then a 40k lower purchase price would be needed. I.e. if house was now 460k they are no better off (lower upfront payment but lost again in higher int payments).

    So Im not saying prices drop but it does impact purchasing power and ability to service debt for lot of people. Maybe supply is so bad and savings so high that buyers shrug it off. Time will tell.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,620 ✭✭✭PokeHerKing


    Anecdotally I'd have to disagree. Myself and most of social circle bought between 2012-2015 with standard 10/20% deposits.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,714 ✭✭✭Deub


    Hardly back breaking for most people who are considering getting a mortgage at this level.

    Do you really believe this? Do you think adding an additional 2 monthly mortgage repayments per year is easy for a couple at 57k gross per year each?

    I would be surprised that people on this salary have 3.5k easy on hand without making any sacrifices somewhere else.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,095 ✭✭✭Villa05


    Would have to agree, Banks are healthy going into this mess and the higher rates increase there revenues. If your a good candidate for a mortgage you'll get one.

    Current prices need even further supply squeeze and state buying as investment funds cool there jets.

    At some point the state will have to switch to supply measures over demand as the backlash from the public increases




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,325 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump



    Do you think that your mortgage repayments in 2022 were less than someone who had bought a similar property to yours in say 2007? I'd imagine they were. Possible trackers notwithstanding!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,906 ✭✭✭combat14


    throw in rising electrictiy, rising grocery bills, rising heating bills, extra fuel bills, kids, creche payments, two car payments into the mix and then try and come up with two extra mortgage payments a year some people are so out of touch 😑



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 22,705 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    How can you not include trackers. 70%+ of loans were trackers and the competition back then had them as low as 0.75% with funds.

    When you allow for that fact many of the people were probably no worse off. Allow for the fact that they have 7 years extra paid off there loans and if they were renting they would have probably forked out 35-40k in those seven years.

    If you had a permanent job it was grand many were squeezed out because they had no jobs, were in and out of work or had temporary contracts.

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,620 ✭✭✭PokeHerKing


    Agreed. Recession is only a thing to the unemployed. I and most people I knew never lost jobs and went on about life as normal. Buying houses etc.

    I could be wrong but I doubt cash buyers made up much more of the market back then than they currently do.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,325 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump



    Not sure why you are trying to argue something different and irrelevant. The original point I responded to was:

    The only buyers who benefit from increasing rates are cash buyers

    Even taking trackers into account (I said notwithstanding, not ignoring) it is the case that there would be circumstances for people who waited who would have been in better off financial position compared to those who jumped in at the top. That you might know one or two cases which were not better off does not prove that the only part of the original post. Talking about "many" does not prove an assertion as to "all".



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 210 ✭✭Mr Hindley


    Latest picture on supply, for what it's worth. Will be interesting to see if it starts to go up again over the spring, or stays flat. I get the sense that after a sudden flurry immediately after Christmas, things are stagnating a bit, with more (but not all properties) lingering on the market.

    image.png




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,906 ✭✭✭combat14


    i get the sense that it is january and that there are approx. 4000 more homes on the market on daft compared to Jan last year or a 30% increase on last year ((17000-13000)/13000) these figures can be interpreted many ways too soon to say anything definitive just yet



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,325 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump



    I thought this was interesting. Reminded me a bit about the Banks selling off branch portfolios before the crash.


    In the below, the seller of an ongoing concern is willing to effectively "lend" 55% of the purchase price to the buyer.





  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,095 ✭✭✭Villa05


    Over 1,000 per month per room, 2,000 for a 1 bed apartment

    Pricey



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,325 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump



    The more interesting thing is that they are willing to give you their capital for you to take on whatever risk they are currently exposed to...................



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,095 ✭✭✭Villa05


    Which wouldn't be too far off 6% and rising. A game of pass the risk parcel before it blows up.

    2 major US real estate funds have cancelled redemptions to prevent selling and price discovery. This may work as the markets are kiddy expecting a reverse in interest rates.

    A reverse in interest rates will likely lead to much higher inflation. Very dangerous year ahead for assets



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,325 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump



    Those funds have likely capped, rather than cancelled, redemptions btw. And it was likely in the terms under which investors gave their money. What you saw was probably reports that the caps were hit.

    Same effect to the investor wanting to get their money out. The nuance is that it is not the fund that are changing their conditions, rather that "too many" investors are trying to cash out at the same time. So it points more towards investor sentiment.


    The risk that they are more likely worried about would be the price of houses falling.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 22,705 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    The figures do not add up. It's 106 bed spaces. They will cost 128/unit. The yield( with an estimated summer yield ) is 13.5k/ bed space.

    The telling part is they are only willing to finance 55% of the purchase price themselves. Pricing is stupid 35% of purchase price will protect them from any downside.

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    they reduce their risk from 100% to 55% while realising any gains on appreciation of the property price

    This wouldn’t be uncommon activity for a fund



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,095 ✭✭✭Villa05


    I'd say we are not too far away from this in Ireland also




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,146 ✭✭✭Jonnyc135


    JBS meats building houses, some how I doubt Larry Goodman will start that, mobile homes and caravans for migrant workers would be more like it in the form of housing



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,325 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump



    The vendor is getting out of 100% their investment in the property and then buying debt instead. Completely different asset class.


    It isn't a property company realising some gain in one property to use to develop their next project.



Advertisement
Advertisement