Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1774775777779780789

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,547 ✭✭✭Villa05


    For someone that lectures others on basic economics, you seem to have quickly forgotten the effects of state policies and inactions pumping asset prices has on an economy.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭The Student


    The result of state inaction is why we are where we are. The state abdicated its responsibility to house people and left it to the private sector simply because it can't manage the process.

    Cant/wont pay your rent don't worry we will introduce a mechanism that delays your actual eviction so your not the States responsibility for now.

    What exactly do you think businesses do? They look to earn profits again simple economics!

    Want to solve the housing crisis get the state to build themselves, but don't want to go back to council estates because of anti social issues! Deal with that issue and you go a good way towards dealing with the housing crisis.

    But sorry I forgot "I'm entitled" to this or that, do you actually think any politician is going to take hard decisions?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,585 ✭✭✭CorkRed93


    didnt think it was possible to build for under 300k. you learn something new every day….



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,547 ✭✭✭Villa05


    You might also notice that duplexes are cheaper than houses which might be a shock to Dublin developers.

    As other posters state Business have to make profit and when you have a government with a blank cheque book backed up by other people's money and lobbyists from government parties. You make hay while the sun shines. Organic growth, I believe is the politically correct term

    Nothing more dangerous than fools with other people's money



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭The Student


    Why does the first property quote "reduced prices" in the article. So who is paying for the "reduction" in price? Also the article indicates this is a shared ownership scheme.

    Or that the second property is listed as secondhand on the ppr register .



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,547 ✭✭✭Villa05


    From the council website It looks like the affordable home is priced at 15% below "market" value (the figure quoted). The council then takes an equity share depending on your max mortgage between 5 and 15% of the above discount

    The 2nd property is to show that you can get a similar property for less than the affordable house price on the 2nd hand private market without any subsidies

    This means that the only effect of the subsidies is to drive up price and risk to the buyer/council



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭The Student


    "The attached suggests "First-time buyers and those seeking a fresh start will be eligible to purchase homes which are significantly discounted from market rates"

    https://www.ilovelimerick.ie/bru-na-gruadan-castletroy/



  • Registered Users Posts: 5 piberry


    Another insight into where taxpayer money is being allocated for apparently affordable housing, this time for a new apartment development in Limerick City. I'm hoping some of the otherwise unfathomable figures quoted are a misprint. Below is from a Limerick Post article last Wednesday:

    It is understood that 17 of the planned units will transfer to Limerick City and County Council to be used as social and affordable housing at a cost of over €9million.

    One-bed units would cost the council an average of €505,000 each, while a two-bed would see the council shell out over €660,000 each.

    These prices “reflect the high standard of design and specification of the proposed residential units, amenities, and facilities,” the planning files state.



  • Registered Users Posts: 192 ✭✭Montys return




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,547 ✭✭✭Villa05




  • Registered Users Posts: 4,547 ✭✭✭Villa05


    Looks like the owners of Arthur's Quay shopping centre are not going to let this opportunity of a lifetime pass them by either.

    There is no end to the madness



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 8,467 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sierra Oscar


    I'm doing some reading up on The Affordable Home Purchase Scheme after the developer in a local estate put a few houses up for sale in conjunction with the Local Authority.

    I am shocked that a three bed house that was available to purchase from the developer a year ago for €420,000 is now being listed with a market value of €500,000 by the developer. This is resulting in applicants being required to afford repayments on a mortgage of between €400,000 and €470,000.

    This comes across as a blatant scam to me. How are the houses now valued at €500,000 when the developer was selling the exact same units a year ago for €420,000? Oh and these houses have sat vacant for a year during a housing crisis, but that's another discussion.

    Am I missing something here? What is the story with this scheme?

    It's also disgraceful that €400,000 is considered 'affordable' for a three bed house.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,117 ✭✭✭DataDude


    No idea on the first part, but if you do the maths on the mortgage.
    €400k @ 3.6% (AIB) for 35 years gives a monthly mortgage payment of €1,662.

    Using the old calculation of an affordable mortgage being 1/3rd of household net take home pay would mean you need a monthly household net income of €4,980. €2,490 per person. €30k net annual, €35k gross annual per person.

    Median full time salary these days is c.€50k.

    Seems affordable to me. Could you even rent a 1 bed apartment for €1,650 in many places these days?



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,244 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    A year is a long time in property sales, if the 420k units sold out a year ago, it is conceivable that they would sell for 500k now if the demand is there. Is there a condition in the planning that these houses had to be social/affordable housing? That might explain why they remained vacant, or, the developer may have held onto them for a higher price.
    Which estate are you referring to?

    Post edited by Dav010 on


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,272 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    The area around Bŕu Na Gruadan and the estate itself would have a lot of Student accommodation. It would not be a high priced area. Move that house a mile away into Monaleen and it probably be 100k more.

    Its the reality of a lot of locations. The LA for instance often pay 100k+ to renovate houses in some LA estates, where is a house comes for sale it much the same price to buy. Its similar to the recession where houses sold for less than build value.

    Locally there is an affordable scheme of 8 houses being build........for the last 5 years. COVID interrupted the process when it started ( they were being build for the LA) as prices exceeded costs the build stopped. The LA had not the flexibility to renegotiate the contract. An affordable housing entity then took over the site about two years ago and its still not finished.

    No state body should have anything to do with build housing.

    Post edited by Bass Reeves on

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,949 ✭✭✭Blut2


    Its absolutely affordable for said hypothetical household (especially compared to renting), but theres no way a household with €70k gross income is getting a €400k mortgage from the banks. Thats as big a problem.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,151 ✭✭✭combat14


    sure thats only a mere 20% increase on already heady prices



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,244 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    If that is market value, then that’s market value.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,117 ✭✭✭DataDude


    Absolutely but if you follow that along it would suggest bank lending is too conservative and limits should be increased further - but I would imagine that would be wildly unpopular with reasonable concerns it would be inflationary.

    Perhaps LTI exemptions, underwritten by government, for those selected for affordable housing schemes. Particularly for those already showing evidence of prolonged rent repayments far in excess of the mortgage amount.

    This might keep it narrow based enough to not inflate the wider market.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 273 ✭✭Gary_dunne


    That hypothetical household could get a max mortgage of 280k, on a 35k salary if you're paying rent and bills there won't be a tonne left over for savings at the end of each month. 400k isn't affordable to a couple like this.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,949 ✭✭✭Blut2


    LTI exemptions underwitten by the government would certainly help some households qualify. But its still a zero sum game - the real problem we have is too little supply.

    Helping one household to buy a house that would have sold anyway to another just means the other household isn't buying it, so as a country its a net gain of zero additional families housed but at a large financial cost to the exchequer.

    It would be much better for the government to use that money to actually just build affordable housing at scale.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,272 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    There Are very few couples trying to buy houses earning 70k between them in Dublin. It about 17 euro/ hour.

    A teacher that is full time and permanent 5-6 yearsis on 55k as are guards and nurses ( admittedly with shift abd a bit of OT)at that stage as well. Such a couple earning 100k/ anum between them would have 1500/ week take home or 6.5k/ month in take home pay. Mortgage woukd be 26% of monthly take home pay

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,117 ✭✭✭DataDude


    I think we’re arguing a slightly different point about ‘affordability’ and ‘attainbility’. Unfortunately the later brings you down the road of loosening lending limits which naturally is very unpopular.

    The point I was making is you see lots of quite emotional responses to house prices. Regularly characterised by saying the price in full sentences - ‘That 3 bed house is almost half a million euro’

    The reality is, it’s 2024, inflation has happened. €400k is just not that much, especially when you compare it to the prices in the shambolic rental market. Almost any couple working full time jobs, even entry level jobs in their early 20s, could fairly comfortably take on a €400k mortgage if the bank would give it to them.

    Agree with all of the above except the last paragraph which has been argued repeatedly on here.

    I don’t believe the government is capable of directly delivering house building at scale and with efficiency. I think the current government agrees with that position and feels their best way to scale building is to underpin demand to give confidence to private sector to scale up. They will say this is working. Many will argue it’s not working fast enough.

    I accept there is an ideological alternative which I’m not saying is definitely wrong but I just don’t subscribe to it myself.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,547 ✭✭✭Villa05


    I had a quick trawl of the property price register for home sales in Limerick for 2023 and when you exclude the the transaction under investigation at UL in relation to the purchase in Rhebogue, only 1 property achieved a price in excess of 500k.

    The state buying 1 and 2 bed apartments for in excess of 500 and 600k for social and affordable housing is well beyond stupidity. This has to be fraud on the taxpayer, there could be no other explanation



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,161 ✭✭✭herbalplants


    What auditors review what the tax payers money is spent on? Is it the same auditors who reviewed RTE and their flip flops expenditure?

    Living the life



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,925 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    Ah yes the teacher Garda combo that's always trotted out here

    CSO stats on household incomes would disagree but don't let that interrupt your fantasies



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,547 ✭✭✭Villa05


    Apartments 1 to 61 in Ardhu on the North circular road were purchased for 17,500,000 that's less than 300k a piece. This site is very close to the proposed 600k social and affordable apartments the council is purchasing

    Post edited by Villa05 on


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,262 ✭✭✭SharkMX


    I know a fair few Gardai and a fair few teachers and a fair few nurse. Not one of them is married to any of the other professions. But you would think they only ever married each other the way people put them together :)



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,949 ✭✭✭Blut2


    The issue is that we've spent the last decade trying the FF/FG ideological strategy of the government attempting to inspire the private sector to build in large numbers, while the state stays out of the building market. And the non-partisan, statistical, evidence is very clear that it very clearly hasn't worked.

    Even giving them some allowances for the first few financial crisis recovery years, and just taking the years post-crash recovery - our completions since 2015 have only gone up by an average of 2500 units a year (12.6k in 2015 to 32.6k in 2023). We hit 32.6k last year, but every analyst is in agreement we need closer to 60k. And that yearly increase isn't even accelerating particularly - it was only up 2800 units on 2022. And 2024Q1 figures are down by approaching 20% YoY vs 2023Q1 - so we're now actually potentially going backwards.

    This all despite a booming population, too. We've added over 500,000 people to the population since 2015, so the per capita output growth is even worse.

    We can't afford to spend another decade keeping with this strategy that very clearly isn't delivering.

    The state historically did also very successfully build large scale housing, so I think all the evidence would point to it at least being worth a try at this stage. Because we have enough evidence that the hands-off approach definitely isn't working.

    I think the worst case scenario is the state does deliver large numbers of housing, but significantly over-cost. But at a time of huge fiscal surplus that would surely be a reasonable outcome for the country. Particularly when the alternative is the state wasting huge sums of money on leasing social housing as we're doing now, instead of just building units and gaining the long term asset at least even if the up-front price is inflated.



Advertisement