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*

1684685687689690943

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,853 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Thanks.

    Would a 5% increase on Commercial SD make much difference? The Commercial market will fade out after this year anyway due to the over supply of offices.

    I'd be wary of SFs 17% surcharge on resi developments bought by funds.

    If we deter them too much, the building of larger developments becomes less viable for developers and this strategy could easily lead to a slow down in resi developments - especially when you consider the other headwinds of resi development at the moment.

    Not least the cost of building & labour.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,036 ✭✭✭Villa05


    We've moved beyond social housing being a priority, Ffg have made such a mess of this, what should be the priority is build to rent for teachers, SNA's, nurses, guards and all the other professions (public & private) that are required for the smooth running of our country. We are currently loosing these to countries that value them more after spending loads to educate them to that level.

    Call this a thank you scheme for the front line workers we were lauding during Covid but kicking since covid is no longer an issue

    Doing this would add supply in a cash neutral or revenue positive manner for the state, availing of this Lower cost accomodation allows

    Housing security for the beneficiaries

    Allows them to save a deposit for there own property allowing them to move on and make the house available for the next participant

    Participation disqualifies from ftb grant as your getting protected from the private rental sector, saving the state a significant amount plus cooling new house price inflation.

    The state providing btr would flush out the land hoarders, knowing that a competitor adding supply would devalue there land if they continued to sit on it.

    Supplying build to rent only would prevent the state from gifting state assets to private individuals which is of little no value to the taxpayer. I saw a former council house on the examiner newspaper in Kinsale expected to make 1,000,000 at auction.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,036 ✭✭✭Villa05


    The only difference between SF and current government Policy is that SF want to use public land so that there budget figures look better in a short media clip. But Once you take into account the land value at market prices you end up in same financial cost to tax payer.

    Are you including the cost of the state having idle or under utilised land and property. There are multiple examples

    Having a significant revenue generating asset on this land would be better than having to pay to secure and maintain land and property that is doing nothing



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,036 ✭✭✭Villa05


    Just to be clear I’m not talking about a policy of renting or leasing instead of building because were specifically talking about CRE getting into difficulty and not building BTR

    What the government have been hinting at is providing the funding for apartment complexes that have planning permission but have not yet started.

    If they have not started in a period of 0 interest rates,

    0 tax on investment funds,

    a planning system that is used to increase the value of land rather than get anything built

    Stable prices on materials and labour

    One would have to assume that these projects are severely unviable in current conditions and land prices therefore exposing the taxpayer to potentially enormous losses. This is what I meant by the state being potentially the last fool in the market

    Much better to develop property on the states own land



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


    You should look at SF alternative budget because the extra 7100 units are not all being built on state land. The majority are purchased from existing supply.

    I state units above because 700 the average cost they expect to pay per unit is 165k which would indicate these are 1 bedroom apartments and if they did purchase from the market for social (as stated in their alternative budget) then this 700 equates to 10% of properties advertised in this price bracket no longer being available to private buyers.



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



    Many TDs have rental properties. There probably aren't too many of them trying to buy their first house..............

    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,457 ✭✭✭SharkMX


    I think they are trying to make it attractive to new landlords to come into the market as well as for existing ones to stay.

    Its not enough to make either happen though. So maybe that was the plan. Make it look like they are doing something, but make it so useless and hard to get that noone will claim it.

    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,036 ✭✭✭Villa05


    I'm just proposing solutions, not a spokesperson for SF. Being honest there call last week for mortgage interest relief was the final straw.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 8,806 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sierra Oscar


    I think it's likely it will be increased in successive budgets if FF / FG are in Government, this is just a starting point. It will be unpopular enough in some quarters introducing it alone.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,036 ✭✭✭Villa05


    Mother of sweet divine Jesus more monty phyton comedy from from the budget

    Help to buy us being extended to those availing of affordable purchase scheme.

    How do they announce this madness and keep a straight face



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 396 ✭✭SummerK


    Will we ever see 300k ish new house prices for 3-bed in and around cork city ever or is it only in dreams? 400k+ is the norm now for a 3-bed. Affordability is getting worse day after day 😩



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


    Just look back to 2005/6 when they abolished it for a year and house market flat lines…reintroduced a year later and price went up.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,036 ✭✭✭Villa05


    With regard to property FFG will not do anything unless it's inflationary. That's been the record for nearly 30 years



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,248 ✭✭✭JohnnyChimpo


    Not a hope unless there's a huge crash again (seems unlikely), at which point unless you have cash on hand you're still gonna be sh1t out of luck



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,853 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Think yourself lucky!

    In Dublin, 400k is a 2 bed apartment.

    Newish 3 bed houses in ok areas are easily 600k, often more.

    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    you might have to cut your cloth. look for 2 bed houses where the attic can be easily converted, or 3 beds a bit farther out. not ideal but better to be on the ladder paying a 1000 pm mortgage, than renting for 1600 pm



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 426 ✭✭grumpyperson


    They might find extra workers from the collapsing commercial sector.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,699 ✭✭✭Padre_Pio




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


    It would help if they are building more total housing but from looking at their alternative budget where they plan an extra 7100 social housing units a very large chunk of that is coming from the private market so less houses to rent or buy for anyone that doesn’t qualify for social or affordable housing.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 645 ✭✭✭J_1980


    If SF come in the sales market will become exactly like the rental market: zero supply, especially at the lower end. Currently the government is only meddling in the rental market (HAp, social tenants living in far more space than majority of lower end of working-non-social housing population etc).


    government is not the solution to the problem, government is the problem



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 654 ✭✭✭Ozvaldo


    How are we supposed to buy houses when we are competing with local authorities on the prices thus driving them up ?

    All they are interested in is converting these to social housing

    Banana Republic



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,036 ✭✭✭Villa05


    This is the only way, but gov won't do anything that stabilises or brings a necesarry correction in price. Homelessness and unaffordability are necessary in order to allow continuous house price appreciation

    We've moved beyond social housing being a priority, Ffg have made such a mess of this, what should be the priority is build to rent for teachers, SNA's, nurses, guards and all the other professions (public & private) that are required for the smooth running of our country

    This would flush out the land hoarders, knowing that a government acting on supply would devalue there land where they to continue to sit on it and do nothing. Remember alot of this land was sold by the state at fire sale prices in the last crash.

    Even the mere announcement of change in policy by the government towards supply would panic the land hoarders into action as they would rush to get there's built before the state

    Currently they are incentivised to sit on the land as the government continues with demand side policies, they know there land will continue to rise in value



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 654 ✭✭✭Ozvaldo


    Looks like you are better off packing in the job signing on and going on the housing list to get a house



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,036 ✭✭✭Villa05


    This has to continue because highgher and higher house prices and rents are far more beneficial for the Irish people and economy, until its not.

    We must persist with this policy regardless of the cost. There is no better way




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,457 ✭✭✭SharkMX


    I think we are just going to go for a 1 bed apartment. Just get it over and done with and get out of the rent trap. Its only going one way and we want out of it. If it come s to it in the future we will trade up, but waiting to buy and being outbid is just messing around while we watch both rents and house prices go up as well as supply coming down. Time to take shelter from the market and pop back up in a few years and see whats what. At least we wont have to pay rising rents in the meantime.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,699 ✭✭✭Padre_Pio


    I dunno, you have to plan to live there for the next 5 years, and whatever may happen to you (and your family)

    I have a colleague who bought a 1 bed in 2008, and only moved out in 2017, with a wife and 2 kids.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,457 ✭✭✭SharkMX


    tbh id rather live in my own one bed apartment with two kids for a few years than rent. We should be ok for a while though. No kids.

    Your own place solves so many problems no matter how small it is. If a problem arises that it becomes too small then thats just one problem. If you were renting when you had that problem you would have to first find somewhere (all but impossible), and then if you did find somewhere pay extortionate rent.

    At least if you owned the place your only problem is space and you have time to sort it out.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,803 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Interesting to read your comments, that you're ideally looking to buy a 3 bed house but will reluctantly go ahead and buy an apartment.

    No idea what age you are but years ago when my generation were buying first properties (2000 - 2005ish) everybody was buying apartments to "get on the ladder" with a view to trading up later. Nobody was thinking of buying 3 bed houses straight out of renting.

    The idea of the ladder seems to be totally defunct now, as most seem to be looking to buy their forever home on day one.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,917 ✭✭✭DataDude


    I would assume that is due to the average age of a first time buyer? The concept of laddering up makes sense if you get onto it at 23-25.

    It’s a harder sell if the first rung is at age 30-35. By the time you get to the 3 bed semi, it’s nearly time for downsizing.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,699 ✭✭✭Padre_Pio


    Average age of FTB is increasing, and to be honest, there's no value in apartments anymore, especially not the Celtic tiger-era buildings. You'd almost be better off to save a little extra and get a house.



Advertisement
Advertisement