Property Market 2019

Mad_maxx · 15-02-2019 12:10am

JohnCleary wrote: »

I'm not talking about Limerick, as mentioned above i'm talking about Galway City Centre.

Solid build, excellent location (city centre), solid management company in place.... issue was that it was 2011 and damn all cash around. Every apartment in the complex (for sale), sold on the day. They were genuine bargains. In the few years alone from purchase to sale, the rent almost paid the purchase price (gross), and then sold for triple (purchase) price a few years later.

Each of these units were for sale individually, no bulk purchase necessary. No inside info needed, this was a (very) public auction.

Fair enough but those examples were quite rare and 2011 was not close to the bottom in Galway so it sounds like a quirky day

Calltocall · 15-02-2019 12:23am

Mad_maxx wrote: »

South Dublin is max 10% off

Cheers & what you put the difference in North Dublin roughly at between peak boom and now?

JohnCleary · 15-02-2019 12:28am

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Fair enough but those examples were quite rare and 2011 was not close to the bottom in Galway so it sounds like a quirky day

In the example I give, it certainly was the bottom (city centre apartments, with no strings attached).

If it weren't the bottom, show me an example of something that has more than tripled it's price since 2011.

Quirky day... possibly. But this was an auction that was advertised nationally, certainly took balls (imho) to bid on the day... but those who dared came out winners.

kippy · 15-02-2019 12:33am

JohnCleary wrote: »

In the example I give, it certainly was the bottom (city centre apartments, with no strings attached).

If it weren't the bottom, show me an example of something that has more than tripled it's price since 2011.

Quirky day... possibly. But this was an auction that was advertised nationally, certainly took balls (imho) to bid on the day... but those who dared came out winners.

TBH,
I am not sure if something like that took balls, or access to cash. Not many people had access to cash, hence the prices!

Mad_maxx · 15-02-2019 1:01am

JohnCleary wrote: »

In the example I give, it certainly was the bottom (city centre apartments, with no strings attached).

If it weren't the bottom, show me an example of something that has more than tripled it's price since 2011.

Quirky day... possibly. But this was an auction that was advertised nationally, certainly took balls (imho) to bid on the day... but those who dared came out winners.

1. 2011 wasn't the bottom in Galway or anywhere else

2.trebbling of prices is an anomaly

Mad_maxx · 15-02-2019 8:43am

Calltocall wrote: »

Cheers & what you put the difference in North Dublin roughly at between peak boom and now?

Clontarf is closer to peak than santry, I'd say 15% in the desirable areas, West Dublin is furthest off, so many apartments in citywest and apartments further off

Glenbhoy · 15-02-2019 9:35am

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Clontarf is closer to peak than santry, I'd say 15% in the desirable areas, West Dublin is furthest off, so many apartments in citywest and apartments further off

Rathfarnham, Terenure appear to be circa 65% of peak, anecdotal prices from way back v ppr, so more of a guestimate than anything else.

Again property specific, but prices haven't rocketed like elsewhere from the trough, specific estates in my area are about 50-60% up, but transactions at the bottom were minimal. More transactions circa 2014 and prices up by about 30-40% from then.

Bob24 · 15-02-2019 10:56am

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Getting mortgage approval was extremely hard unless you had at least 30% of a deposit until about 2014

I guess noone has hard figures to argue either way, but i disagree with that. Maybe people thought they were rejected because of an imaginary 30% deposit requirement, while in fact it is their LTI ratio, employment status, or savings history which were the issue. I certainly know of several people (including myself) who had mortgages approved during that time and I don’t remember ever reading about such requirement anywhere (do you are a source where a 30% deposit requirement is clearly mentioned?)

Plus what started this discussion is the fact that a poster mentioned that people who have been saving up for the bad times and hoping to buy then will find it nearly impossible to get funding. So in the group we are talking about, a lot will have those 30% deposits anyway.

Cuddlesworth · 15-02-2019 11:11am

Glenbhoy wrote: »

Rathfarnham, Terenure appear to be circa 65% of peak, anecdotal prices from way back v ppr, so more of a guestimate than anything else.

Its worth pointing out that towards the end, when sales were cooling off and builders were bailing left and right, some wealthy people were still throwing money at houses. A house behind my parents house went for 1.2 mil in late 2007, the same house 4 doors down is currently looking for 725k, eg 60% of "peak" price. Except when the crash came, he was the only person in the row because nobody else bought them at those crazy prices.

Mad_maxx · 15-02-2019 11:45am

Glenbhoy wrote: »

Rathfarnham, Terenure appear to be circa 65% of peak, anecdotal prices from way back v ppr, so more of a guestimate than anything else.

Again property specific, but prices haven't rocketed like elsewhere from the trough, specific estates in my area are about 50-60% up, but transactions at the bottom were minimal. More transactions circa 2014 and prices up by about 30-40% from then.

Not even the bogs of Leitrim are 65% off peak.

If you think rathfarnham is that far off peak, your calendar must read February 2012

Mad_maxx · 15-02-2019 11:49am

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Its worth pointing out that towards the end, when sales were cooling off and builders were bailing left and right, some wealthy people were still throwing money at houses. A house behind my parents house went for 1.2 mil in late 2007, the same house 4 doors down is currently looking for 725k, eg 60% of "peak" price. Except when the crash came, he was the only person in the row because nobody else bought them at those crazy prices.

It must have taken a very long time to officially register as sold as when the peak arrived in February 2007, it was almost immediately as if someone hit the trapdoor button, by end of 2007, prices had fallen quite a bit even that did not register until 2008

the butcher · 15-02-2019 12:47pm

Very depressing looking at all these new estates at extortionate prices with no driveway to park in, little to no garden at the front and three stories becoming more and more common.

Doop · 15-02-2019 12:51pm

the butcher wrote: »

Very depressing looking at all these new estates at extortionate prices with no driveway to park in, little to no garden at the front and three stories becoming more and more common.

I would agree with you on the price, but as for the rest we really do need to make our peace with higher density. The days of the 3 bed semi with a room/garage to the side and side access are gone... and I would think rightly so. The urban sprawl that was allowed go on in previous generations is reprehensible.

Bluefoam · 15-02-2019 12:53pm

the butcher wrote: »

Very depressing looking at all these new estates at extortionate prices with no driveway to park in, little to no garden at the front and three stories becoming more and more common.

I don't undertand why 3 stories is a negative? You get larger rooms in a smaller footprint & better heating management. If you want a house with parking, then buy a house with parking. Many people, particularly young people, don't want front gardens due to the amount of work they require to maintain.

The_Conductor · 15-02-2019 1:03pm

the butcher wrote: »

Very depressing looking at all these new estates at extortionate prices with no driveway to park in, little to no garden at the front and three stories becoming more and more common.

Location is everything though.
High density and no parking- is fine- in an urban area with good transport options. Its less fine- when you go more subburban or rural. Also- 3 stories- shouldn't be anything that we complain about- I can't see what the issue is. I'd love to see 20-25 storey developments- of affordable housing units- in locations with good services, facilities and amenities- who are capable of absorbing these type developments- but especially in Dublin, Cork and Galway city centres. We *need* high density units- in large volumes- where people need to live. We also need to accept that there has to be affordable housing- for public sector employees and other low paid but vital members of society. Its just not fair that a teacher, a nurse or a Garda- should drive 100km+ to or from work- in fact its a form of cruel and unusual punishment to make this the norm. Living in Dublin- should not be the sole remit of financiers and bankers- it should accommodate a good cross section of our workers- and there should be a particular effort, in my opinion, to accommodate those who work at the coal face. I would argue that lesser productive members of our communities- should not have an expectation of housing in the highest demand areas- I'm not suggesting for a moment a hell or to Connaught approach- but we should have affordable houses in our city centres- for critical members of our communities- I would argue the entirety of the social housing allocation be instead commuted into an affordable housing quotient instead- in all city centre developments.

Housing is a mess in general- however, we also have a golden opportunity to use what is often a greenfield approach- to make provisions for the future- instead of copperfastening and mollycoddling the past.

The_Conductor · 15-02-2019 1:05pm

I see Cairn have had their planning application for 400+ houses in the Newcastle/Lucan SDZ turned down- as unsuitable. I know it was a very early stage refusal- but does anyone know what the grounds for turning down the application were? Personally I think the whole SDZ is a recipe for a disaster- however, it looks like An Bord Pleanála are actually giving it fair and reasonable consideration- in light of the many local objections.

browne_rob5 · 15-02-2019 1:14pm

the butcher wrote: »

Very depressing looking at all these new estates at extortionate prices with no driveway to park in, little to no garden at the front and three stories becoming more and more common.

Front gardens are a waste of time unless you are into gardening. You cant use it for anything as there is no privacy but still have to spend time maintaining it. I never see anyone using them in our estate or any estate for that matter.

Rew · 15-02-2019 2:33pm

Bluefoam wrote: »

I don't undertand why 3 stories is a negative? You get larger rooms in a smaller footprint & better heating management. If you want a house with parking, then buy a house with parking.

From talking to people that live in them they find the layout less than idea especially with younger children. Sitting room and kitchen on different floors. Parking for visitors is often a big hassle in new style estates

mkdon · 15-02-2019 2:50pm

browne_rob5 wrote: »

Front gardens are a waste of time unless you are into gardening. You cant use it for anything as there is no privacy but still have to spend time maintaining it. I never see anyone using them in our estate or any estate for that matter.

but a driveway would be nice ... at this prices

Kidkinobe · 15-02-2019 2:51pm

Stupid estate agent...Went to view a house a week back and slept on it for a bit and then went back for a second look. Advertised at 220k but agent said sellers wanted more than that so I asked him to find out what they wanted for it...He got back to me with , they want 260 for it, it was just put on at 220 to get attention plus the seller thinks it will be worth 260 in a few years time...I suggested to him that if the seller thinks they can get 260 for it in a few years then maybe they should put it on the market in a few years, but trying to sell it right now is wasting everyones time if they are not going to accept current market value which would be about 220 going by recent sales in the same estate. I don't think that estate agent will try sell me a house again.

q85dw7osi4lebg · 15-02-2019 2:52pm

Kidkinobe wrote: »

Stupid estate agent...Went to view a house a week back and slept on it for a bit and then went back for a second look. Advertised at 220k but agent said sellers wanted more than that so I asked him to find out what they wanted for it...He got back to me with , they want 260 for it, it was just put on at 220 to get attention plus the seller thinks it will be worth 260 in a few years time...I suggested to him that if the seller thinks they can get 260 for it in a few years then maybe they should put it on the market in a few years, but trying to sell it right now is wasting everyones time if they are not going to accept current market value which would be about 220 going by recent sales in the same estate. I don't think that estate agent will try sell me a house again.

Stupid estate agent or stupid seller? Maybe even stupid viewer?:pac:

Kidkinobe · 15-02-2019 3:02pm

Rex Disgusting Tariff wrote: »

Stupid estate agent or stupid seller? Maybe even stupid viewer?:pac:

Stupid estate agent, he told me that the seller is his brother in law. And going by the chat I had with him..he has told his brother in law he would get him 260k for it while he also told me that 3 offers they have already had were 180k, 190k and 210k...offers have stopped coming in since the last offer of 210k.

Pussyhands · 15-02-2019 3:09pm

browne_rob5 wrote: »

Front gardens are a waste of time unless you are into gardening. You cant use it for anything as there is no privacy but still have to spend time maintaining it. I never see anyone using them in our estate or any estate for that matter.

Actually there should really be a large lawn area because there needs to be somewhere for the rainwater to soak into. Earth can absorb about 2 inches per hour.

q85dw7osi4lebg · 15-02-2019 3:21pm

Kidkinobe wrote: »

Stupid estate agent, he told me that the seller is his brother in law. And going by the chat I had with him..he has told his brother in law he would get him 260k for it while he also told me that 3 offers they have already had were 180k, 190k and 210k...offers have stopped coming in since the last offer of 210k.

Wouldn't worry about it so, move on find another, but be aware asking prices are just that. Think of it as "offers over".

Kidkinobe · 15-02-2019 3:27pm

Rex Disgusting Tariff wrote: »

Wouldn't worry about it so, move on find another, but be aware asking prices are just that. Think of it as "offers over".

Its false advertising...if a car yard had a car up for sale and was offered at 10k in the paper and you went into look at it and they told you they wanted 12k for it...Do you not think you would have wasted two hours of your time...

Bob24 · 15-02-2019 3:29pm

Kidkinobe wrote: »

Its false advertising...if a car yard had a car up for sale and was offered at 10k in the paper and you went into look at it and they told you they wanted 12k for it...Do you not think you would have wasted two hours of your time...

I personally think it’s a bad practice, but in this country it is neither illegal nor against professional ethics of the profession (in many countries it is one, the other or both).

q85dw7osi4lebg · 15-02-2019 3:31pm

Kidkinobe wrote: »

Its false advertising...if a car yard had a car up for sale and was offered at 10k in the paper and you went into look at it and they told you they wanted 12k for it...Do you not think you would have wasted two hours of your time...

The difference is it's impossible to know what a house is worth. Why take the first offer of the asking when you can get more? The same viewers get annoyed when they bid below the asking and get involved in a so called bidding war.

Kidkinobe · 15-02-2019 3:40pm

Bob24 wrote: »

I personally think it’s a bad practice, but in this country it is neither illegal nor against professional ethics of the profession (in many countries it is one, the other or both).

Rules and regs are there for misleading advertising ..The ad stated 220...which I assumed was 200 to 240 range...not 260 plus. Its a totally misleading ad when I have been told they want 260 for it. Which is their own choice, but the ad for the property is very misleading.
The main legislation concerning advertisements in Ireland is the Consumer Protection Act, 2007. This Act sets out, among other things, various rules that apply to claims made about goods and services. In particular this Act protects consumers from misleading advertisements and ensures that trade is fair. Under the Act it is an offence for an advertiser/trader to make false claims about goods, services or prices. All types of communications that promote goods or services are covered by the Act. This includes advertisements, a notice in a shop or even a claim made by a sales assistant about a product or service. EU laws also ensure that misleading advertising is forbidden in all Member States. Under SI 134/1988 (European Communities (Misleading Advertising) Regulations, 1988), any person can apply to the High Court for an order prohibiting the publication of misleading advertising.

What is 'Misleading Advertising'?
Misleading advertising means advertising that deceives or is likely to deceive anyone that sees it. Misleading advertising may affect consumers’ choices regarding what they buy. It’s worth bearing in mind, that it may be an offence for a trader to advertise good or services if it is likely to mislead and therefore cause loss, damage or injury to the public.

klaaaz · 15-02-2019 4:35pm

browne_rob5 wrote: »

Front gardens are a waste of time unless you are into gardening. You cant use it for anything as there is no privacy but still have to spend time maintaining it. I never see anyone using them in our estate or any estate for that matter.

Some people use them for sitting out in the sun as their back garden is north facing

Bob24 · 15-02-2019 4:39pm

Kidkinobe wrote: »

Rules and regs are there for misleading advertising ..The ad stated 220...which I assumed was 200 to 240 range...not 260 plus. Its a totally misleading ad when I have been told they want 260 for it. Which is their own choice, but the ad for the property is very misleading.
The main legislation concerning advertisements in Ireland is the Consumer Protection Act, 2007. This Act sets out, among other things, various rules that apply to claims made about goods and services. In particular this Act protects consumers from misleading advertisements and ensures that trade is fair. Under the Act it is an offence for an advertiser/trader to make false claims about goods, services or prices. All types of communications that promote goods or services are covered by the Act. This includes advertisements, a notice in a shop or even a claim made by a sales assistant about a product or service. EU laws also ensure that misleading advertising is forbidden in all Member States. Under SI 134/1988 (European Communities (Misleading Advertising) Regulations, 1988), any person can apply to the High Court for an order prohibiting the publication of misleading advertising.

What is 'Misleading Advertising'?
Misleading advertising means advertising that deceives or is likely to deceive anyone that sees it. Misleading advertising may affect consumers’ choices regarding what they buy. It’s worth bearing in mind, that it may be an offence for a trader to advertise good or services if it is likely to mislead and therefore cause loss, damage or injury to the public.

If it was considered false advertising as part of the act, it wouldn’t be standard practice for pretty much every single estate agent in this country.

Some agents can be dodgy, but the whole profession breaking the law on a daily basis and nothing happening about it (either reaction from the public or from the government or both) seems fairly unlikely.

cruizer101 · 15-02-2019 4:39pm

Kidkinobe wrote: »

Its false advertising...if a car yard had a car up for sale and was offered at 10k in the paper and you went into look at it and they told you they wanted 12k for it...Do you not think you would have wasted two hours of your time...

Similar thing happens in cars as in houses.
When houses or cars are sold by a developer/garage prices are set and more or less non-negotiable (little haggle room in cars).
When houses/cars are sold by a individual they put it up at a price but that price isn't set in stone.
Why would someone sell a house for less than they can get.

Bluefoam · 15-02-2019 4:39pm

klaaaz wrote: »

Some people use them for sitting out in the sun as their back garden is north facing

Thats nice... but rather than purchasing the additional space at the front of my property, I'd probably use the money to buy a south facing property... then I'd have sun & privacy...If I couldn't afford the south facing aspect, I doubt I could afford a north facing with a decent front garden either.

tobsey · 15-02-2019 8:02pm

Consumer protection act in relation to the sale of a second hand house. Jesus wept. I feel bad for estate agents and sellers.

Kidkinobe · 15-02-2019 8:26pm

cruizer101 wrote: »

Similar thing happens in cars as in houses.
When houses or cars are sold by a developer/garage prices are set and more or less non-negotiable (little haggle room in cars).
When houses/cars are sold by a individual they put it up at a price but that price isn't set in stone.
Why would someone sell a house for less than they can get.

They are welcome to sell it what ever price they want...but advertising it at 100k and when people showing up to look are told they want 150k for it is what the discussion is about..If you are going to advertise at 100k you will get people with 100 k to spend, people with 150k will be looking at 150 k houses.

q85dw7osi4lebg · 15-02-2019 9:07pm

It works both ways folks. Agents advertise properties for 300k and people offer 260k.

Can't have your cake and eat it.

Kidkinobe · 15-02-2019 9:22pm

Rex Disgusting Tariff wrote: »

It works both ways folks. Agents advertise properties for 300k and people offer 260k.

Can't have your cake and eat it.

its fair enough to advertise at 300k and get offers at 250, you can just say no thanks, we will wait for the advertised price but advertising at 250 and then showing up and the agent saying, 'only joking, we want 300'..Sure you can say no thanks, but you have just wasted your time looking at a house that you were led to believe by the ad that it was in your price region.

Bob24 · 15-02-2019 9:27pm

Rex Disgusting Tariff wrote: »

It works both ways folks. Agents advertise properties for 300k and people offer 260k.

Can't have your cake and eat it.

Doesn’t have to be that way though. In many countries the advertised price is the high expectation of the seller and offering it means your offer will be accepted as long as you are a genuine buyer. And on the other hand since that price is usually a little inflated compared to market rate it is acceptable for someone to offer less, with obviously no obligation for the seller to consider/accept those offers.

I prefer that system which I have experienced both as a seller and a buyer as it makes the sale a lot less hectic and I believe it reduces the score for messers on both sides of the fence.

I also think a positive e side effect is that it tends to standardise and stabilise the property market.

q85dw7osi4lebg · 15-02-2019 9:43pm

Bob24 wrote: »

Doesn’t have to be that way though. In many countries the advertised price is the high expectation of the seller and offering it means your offer will be accepted as long as you are a genuine buyer. And on the other hand since that price is usually a little inflated compared to market rate it is acceptable for someone to offer less, with obviously no obligation for the seller to consider/accept those offers.

I prefer that system which I have experienced both as a seller and a buyer as it makes the sale a lot less hectic and I believe it reduces the score for messers on both sides of the fence; thus less time wasting for everyone.

I also think a positive e side effect is that it tends to standardise and stabilise the property market.

But that is the case with most sellers, it's just a select few agents have different mechanisms to achieve the best sales price. It's literally just business. At the end of the day, the property will always sell for what it's worth.

Bluefoam · 15-02-2019 9:52pm

The market decides the value of a house, not the seller. If no one offers them what they want then the house doesn't sell, or the seller reconsiders. It might be stressful for buyers (some), but ultimately if someone makes an offer they should be comfortable that they are offering what they consider a good price.

If you are outbid, it just means someone is willing to pay more for the property than you are...

If you can't afford market prices, you need to consider your criteria against budget. People are still buying houses, therefore they consider that there is value in the market and can afford the prices.

Bob24 · 15-02-2019 11:02pm

Rex Disgusting Tariff wrote: »

But that is the case with most sellers, it's just a select few agents have different mechanisms to achieve the best sales price. It's literally just business. At the end of the day, the property will always sell for what it's worth.

I wouldn’t say most sellers. It really depends on the type of property,
location, and selling strategy.

When I was looking in a high demand area of Dublin almost everything was purposely priced significantly below wha the seller was actually looking for.

q85dw7osi4lebg · 15-02-2019 11:30pm

Bob24 wrote: »

I wouldn’t say most sellers. It really depends on the type of property,
location, and selling strategy.

When I was looking in a high demand area of Dublin almost everything was purposely priced significantly below wha the seller was actually looking for.

Depends on the agent, from first hand experience, buying, selling and selling for others, in Dublin.

Owners want as much as they can get, not everyone understands this, but when you become a vendor your perspective and understanding switches to the polar opposite of a buyer with regards to strategy and price.

Another point worth noting, from my own experiences at least 75% of people think their own home is worth more than even an agent thinks.

Glenbhoy · 16-02-2019 12:06am

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Not even the bogs of Leitrim are 65% off peak.

If you think rathfarnham is that far off peak, your calendar must read February 2012

Maybe it's as cuddlesworth said, some transactions don't reflect the actual peak, but in my estate, I know prices of almost 900K were paid in '06, similar available on market presently for 550K, lowest as per PPR was 410K in'13.

And I know of several other estates in this general area with almost identical type of scenarios.

q85dw7osi4lebg · 16-02-2019 12:15am

In my area, 420k 3 bed semis in 2008 are now 290k max, 800k detached 5 properties are now 500k ish.

At the bottom, the 420k property was 190k, the 800k was no lower than 360 looking at ppr.

I'm in the north east.

Glenbhoy · 16-02-2019 1:04am

Mad_maxx wrote: »

It must have taken a very long time to officially register as sold as when the peak arrived in February 2007, it was almost immediately as if someone hit the trapdoor button, by end of 2007, prices had fallen quite a bit even that did not register until 2008

From my recollection, prices didn't actually fall significantly for a long time, how could they, sure property only goes up in value was the thinking. It took a few years before reality sunk in, but as we all know, inability to repossess meant a true bottom was never reached. I think consensus is that the bottom was somewhere around early 2012?
I know from ppr that prices where I am were the same in 2010 as 2014. 2012 ppr for similar estates in locale were the lowest I saw, but not sure if I'm comparing like with like as properties were a little different.

awec · 16-02-2019 2:01am

Rew wrote: »

From talking to people that live in them they find the layout less than idea especially with younger children. Sitting room and kitchen on different floors. Parking for visitors is often a big hassle in new style estates

Sitting room and kitchen on different floors is not normal.

Three story houses are usually just a 4 bedroom in the footprint of a 3 bed. Or a 5 bed in the footprint of a 4 bed. It makes sense from a space point of view.

q85dw7osi4lebg · 16-02-2019 2:05am

awec wrote: »

Sitting room and kitchen on different floors is not normal.

Three story houses are usually just a 4 bedroom in the footprint of a 3 bed. Or a 5 bed in the footprint of a 4 bed. It makes sense from a space point of view.

Agreed, I'm in a 3 story 4 bed, 1600 sq ft but 400 sq ft is top floor master. They make a lot of sense in certain areas.

Bob24 · 16-02-2019 9:56am

Rex Disgusting Tariff wrote: »

Depends on the agent, from first hand experience, buying, selling and selling for others, in Dublin.

Owners want as much as they can get, not everyone understands this, but when you become a vendor your perspective and understanding switches to the polar opposite of a buyer with regards to strategy and price.

Another point worth noting, from my own experiences at least 75% of people think their own home is worth more than even an agent thinks.

Of course, buyers want to pay less and sellers want to sell for more. But one thing no one wants is hectic sales and time wasting.

I can see how some people who haven’t experienced other systems think that the only way to extract the most value from a property is our current system whereby asking prices mean nothing and bids as well as sale agreements are non binding (all of those things making the process more hectic). But as I mentionnes buyers and sellers alike in many other countries would disagree with that: there are more structured ways to handle a property sale which also make sellers happy (I am talking with first hand experience).

Mad_maxx · 16-02-2019 1:10pm

Rex Disgusting Tariff wrote: »

In my area, 420k 3 bed semis in 2008 are now 290k max, 800k detached 5 properties are now 500k ish.

At the bottom, the 420k property was 190k, the 800k was no lower than 360 looking at ppr.

I'm in the north east.

2008 was a full year after the peak

Mad_maxx · 16-02-2019 1:15pm

Glenbhoy wrote: »

From my recollection, prices didn't actually fall significantly for a long time, how could they, sure property only goes up in value was the thinking. It took a few years before reality sunk in, but as we all know, inability to repossess meant a true bottom was never reached. I think consensus is that the bottom was somewhere around early 2012?
I know from ppr that prices where I am were the same in 2010 as 2014. 2012 ppr for similar estates in locale were the lowest I saw, but not sure if I'm comparing like with like as properties were a little different.

I was heavily involved with the property market in Dublin in North City Dublin in 2012, the bottom in Dublin 7 was around April 2012, that does not mean you could not buy a house as cheap in November 2012 but prices were not falling from mid 2012 on in most parts of Dublin, cheap lots could be picked up at the likes of the allsop auctions for a few years afterwards even in Dublin, add to that, place like Dublin 8 were up very modestly compared to South Dublin as late as 2015 but the downward trend more or less ended in 2012

The market did not bottom in the likes of Limerick city until about early 2015, another market i know well

Mad_maxx · 16-02-2019 1:21pm

Rex Disgusting Tariff wrote: »

In my area, 420k 3 bed semis in 2008 are now 290k max, 800k detached 5 properties are now 500k ish.

At the bottom, the 420k property was 190k, the 800k was no lower than 360 looking at ppr.

I'm in the north east.

Perhaps but 420 k properties in the North east were never typical, its a bit like million euro plus homes in Dublin 6 finding it hard to get close to the peak today, the average price homes tell the story, not eight bed mansions in Aylesbury Road or roscommon

Property Market 2019

Comments