Who are buying all the new houses?

The CSO says total “net” inward migration is closer to 80,000.
https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications

Based on a total of almost 150,000 inward migration.

I think it is about 60,000 net-inward migration for this year, but the discussion was what number was for EU/UK as opposed to non-EU/UK.

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-pme/populationandmigrationestimatesapril2025/

will be some fun here in 10-15 or so years time when renters start to retire en masse and cant afford to pay the rents anymore

Thanks for the response.

1. It actually doesn't mean that at all. There's no reason that investing in property means you only invest in property. It is an aspect of a portfolio, not a whole portfolio.
   I also think for most people your PPR is not a true investment, although it can used that way.
2. Similarly. There's no reason to be limited to a single property. A single property is unlikely to sufficient to meet portfolio targets.
3. A crash is a bad time to liquidate any assets to be fair. If you need to liquidate in a crash, then choose the easily liquidate assets. Gold crashed in 2011 and it was 10 years making it back. I think its a mistake to assume shares will always bounce back. An individual stock is pretty risky.
4. If you are asking me, Yes. I think you obviously have to be prepared to be a landlord (regardless of who manages it).
   Not sure why you think it's a "rest of your life" situation. I think that's very shorts myopic.
5. I would invest it in whatever is appropriate at the time. CGT is not unique to property.
   Somebody buying shares is faced with the same scenario if they sell.
6. That's applies no matter what you invest me. Don't see how it's a criticism of property specifically.

All of those issues are criticism and risk of investing generally. Nothing there is a reason to avoid property (not to say there are no reasons). Putting everything in one property is overly risky. So it putting it all in gold. Or on Tesla stocks. Diversification is a given. The pension fund hat you mention maximising , likely includes a property portfolio.

Somebody who does or thinks that is an idiot.
But it's a pretty bad conclusion to take that idiot and decided that investing in property is a terrible idea.

The same way putting everything in a single stock is overly risky. Doesn't mean that shares are a terrible idea.

I think we might be at cross purposes here as I was replying to a post that included a specific point that " however, an individual investing in a property to rent as a pension is a terrible idea." 

You replied to my post. And that's exactly the point I was referring to.

Your points address a situation where an investor creates a diversified property portfolio and I would say your advice is absolutely fine in that context.

Investing in property the situation where a persons portfolio includes some property elements, which is far more likely for a personal investor.

For most people thinking about rental property investment for a pension they will most likely only have the funds for one or two properties. I'm not sure how many properties you would have to invest in to create a diversified portfolio but at 375k a pop or nearly 500k in Dublin you would need quite a lot in your pension pot to do that.

Having a diversified portfolio, doesn't require you to own several diverse properties so that the property component is diverse. You can invest in a single property, and diversify the portfolio via other holdings: pension, shares, EFT, Crypto, Gold.

But the massing flaw in your thinking is assume that you can only invest in property when 375-500k to buy properties outright. Are you forgetting that mortgages exist? You don't need to invest in whole properties at a time.

A property fund is probably a better and more manageable investment than a property for someone with a smaller amount to invest. Even taking a single property company could do well - if you invested in Cairn Homes you would have made 115% in capital appreciation alone - dividend history shows between 4 and 7% as well.

A property fund is the easy option, Spreads risk, diverse. But you have to consider that they are taking their own costs and profit out of the total gains before you see a penny.

Cairns homes have great returns the last 24 months. But I'd not like to be somebody who bought in 2018.

Out of curiosity I looked at house prices in the 5 year period - they rose by 44% nationwide 375k vs 260k and 35% in Dublin 500k vs 370k.

For completeness, what were they in the 8 year period above? I assume significantly better the the 5% loss Cairns show on the graph above.

Rents for a 2 bed in Dublin were 1950 (23400 pa) in 2021 (I couldnt finde earlier figures), 2500 (30000 pa) now. Assuming you bought the 370k house in 2020 and spent nothing on it (maintenance repairs, rent collection etc) you were getting 7% yield in 2021 and 8% now. And you would hope that over time that % yield would rise. Note that you would also be due property tax and any other ancillary costs that you don't pay on shares.

7-8% Yield is very good plus 6% annual average growth. Are you suggesting that that's not a great return? Not sure I follow. That's an amazing opportunity.

Thanks for the insight and analysis of the interview, great help.

You essentially did a link dump without actually providing a link.

What's your opinion on it? What was being discussed? You're giving us nothing at all.

It’s not reflected by the figures or reality either, but sure ignore that and go with the personal anecdotal observations that affirm your opinions

Where have I moved the goalposts? lol. The statement that I responded to “was investing in a property is a terrible idea”. If anything, talking about overcommitting to a single investment is moving the goal posts.

Yes you can borrow to let but mortgage interest will reduce your yield, and increase your risk.

Reduces yield, of course, but massively reduces you’re capital investment. You might need only 100k rather than the 370k+ you outlined.

For me, as a person with a wholly owned property, some savings and a pension fund the figures for a single property investment don't work -

Except the figures you gave suggest that it does work, even without money to invest outright. The reasons you gave didn’t hold much water imo.

Obviously, whether it’s property, shares, etc there needs to be capital to invest. If we’re discussing whether discussing whether it’s a terrible investment, I think we should assume that there’s money to invest in one of the options.

Older people who have their mortgages paid off are not thinking about their wealth being devalued if house prices drop. House prices are irrelevent to someone who is planning on staying in their home until they die. In fact, a drop in house price makes it easier to pass the house onto a child when they die - lower or no inheritance tax. I

they're both associated with the high inflation rates that prevailed during that period, which of course significantly eroded the real burden of repaying the principal they had borrowed. High interest rates charged on a principal whose real value is rapidly declining become less burdensome quite fast.

Agree completely. The higher the inflation leads to both - or more accurately inflation is a measurement of the change in value of the currency used to value the asset. The property value outstripped Central Bank rate + margin. Leading to banditry you mentioned.
Inflation was so high, that the principle was so left in the dust and became increasingly trivial. But I agree that the mid 90s were the sweet spot. Escaped the high rates and inflation of the 80s, rode the property boom on the back of the tiger.

One of the issues with looking back at how great that turn out, it that it leads people to assume that history will repeat itself. When in reality, high interest and high inflation is not a great out look for the future.

. . . and you're right. But they are comparing themselves with their parents. And their parents are making the same comparison. Avocadoism is one response to the comparison ("my kids are still living at home because, unlike me at that age, they spend all their money on fancy phones and trips to Barcelona")

Avocadoism is a good word to describe it. It's unfair entirely. Lift is simply a more complicated financially now. We have more outgoings, they are not isolated to Gen Y or Z. Boomers have netflix, internet and mobile phones too.
And sure, people are going out for brunch more now. But they are probably going out sinking pints less. People did save better back in the day. The target was simply close to their income. Income to cost ratio is the only fair measure.

As an aside. I failed to purchase at an auction on Saturday. Outbid by 1 increment. Went for brunch afterwards, considered ordering avocado on toast, but bacon and egg won me over.

e.g. by adding a granny flat, or otherwise extending the property and dividing it into more self-contained areas. I think we'll see more of this. But of course not all home lend themselves to adaptation in this way.

A major issue with that approach is compliance. There are many of the companies offering garden rooms, that are subverting planning law and building regulations by classing these structures as essentially sheds - while clearly marketing them as liveable spaces. The planning issue might resolve itself. But the long term value of a structure will a 12 month warranty is pretty poor. Very quickly people will find out that the $50k investment in the garden adds little value and is an insurance risk