Recession: Which falls first - rent or house prices?

Deleted User wrote: »

We're heading for a deep recession.

We're really not.

Deleted User wrote: »

What is known about how this affects property prices and rents? Both will fall, but which falls first and fastest?

rent seems to have fallen somewhat, you can now rent a bedsit (albeit substandard) on DAFT for about €800 a month. The average full time net salary is about €2,900 a month, so the average person can now snap up a dingy bedsit for just under 30% of their income. It's better than pre corona, but still we have a poor standard of living due to high housing cost.

As for purchasing, I've not noticed significant movement in prices, kip apartments with newspaper walls in kip suburbs still cost 200k. The average worker can afford a €185,000 home as a single person or €370,000 as a couple.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I hope you're right about the (lack of a deep) recession but the Central Bank says it will be the 'worst in history'. Hopefully it will be short.

Thanks for the observation on rents/prices. So, rents are softening but house prices stable enough.

Was there anything about the previous recession that could help predict the next 12 months? Access to credit/mortgages might be a factor.

It seems to be the "worst recession" is more a technicality due to businesses being prevented from trading which recover immediately once restrictions are lifted.

Past recessions were because of other longer lasting factors.

BrokenArrows wrote: »

It seems to be the "worst recession" is more a technicality due to businesses being prevented from trading which recover immediately once restrictions are lifted.

Past recessions were because of other longer lasting factors.

Once restrictions are lifted it will be a struggle to get customers to go. I won't go to a pub or restaurant for the rest of the year.

Coffee shops frequented by office workers will close permanently as they aren't coming back for a while and not all of them will go even if open.

There is going to be a very uneven distribution of effects with the low paid in much more danger. People who could buy houses before can still afford them so house prices may not be effected but rent could drop but it may not be much.

People wishing an outcome they want is where things are being discussed rather than what is actually happening and who it effects.

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Once restrictions are lifted it will be a struggle to get customers to go. I won't go to a pub or restaurant for the rest of the year.

I think you're conflating what you think with what other people think.

Even if you keep your job, if you get hit with higher taxes then your rent/mortgage will be a bigger chunk of your take home.

SozBbz wrote: »

I've no intentions of going to a busy pub but would go to a pub if it was being managed well. I plan to head west for a staycation at some point this month or next, will probably eat in pubs along the way.

I've also been out to a restaurant and plan on going to more.

Am I an idiot?

As far as I am concerned yes you are.

Deleted User wrote: »

Every recession is different, but is there no standard pattern to whether rents fall and this drags down prices - or vice versa?

For example, it was obvious from the last crash that Dublin sales prices dipped first and bounced back first; apartments sank fast but recovered (if memory serves).

Only way house prices will fall are


if the market gets flooded with houses for sale. If it does they will come from the rental market. Landlords selling up. Because there is no oversupply at the moment.


or b)
If the supply of buyers dries up. That would require major job losses.
So maybe rents would fall then. But the country and all of us would be in some state.

SozBbz wrote: »

Well, with that perspective and your exceptional interpersonal skills on display here, the feeling is mutual.

You asked and I answered what interpersonal skills would you like applied to that? Do something I consider stupid and ask if it makes you stupid that is the answer you get.

Why am I stupid? Not wanting to catch or spread a virus, is stupid?

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Once restrictions are lifted it will be a struggle to get customers to go. I won't go to a pub or restaurant for the rest of the year.

Coffee shops frequented by office workers will close permanently as they aren't coming back for a while and not all of them will go even if open.

There is going to be a very uneven distribution of effects with the low paid in much more danger. People who could buy houses before can still afford them so house prices may not be effected but rent could drop but it may not be much.

People wishing an outcome they want is where things are being discussed rather than what is actually happening and who it effects.

You'd be an extreme outlier there. restaurants/bars around me are booked solid, can't get a table.

Ray Palmer wrote: »

You asked and I answered what interpersonal skills would you like applied to that? Do something I consider stupid and ask if it makes you stupid that is the answer you get.

Why am I stupid? Not wanting to catch or spread a virus, is stupid?

So you can call me and idiot, but it doesnt work the other way around - gotcha.

In the spirit of asking and answering questions - why are you stupid?

Unless you are in a high risk category, there is no need to go beyond government guidelines that are based on public health advice.

What I have done and what I intend to do are fully within what has been allowed. I wear a mask to the shops and carry hand sanitizer and follow and have followed all of the advice throughout the pandemic so far. I would love to go on holiday somewhere sunny, but I won't until the advice to do so is clear and unambiguous.

I am continuing to follow the advice, by doing what is now permitted. Yet according to you, that makes me an idiot.

To me, locking myself up over and above the public health advice is pretty stupid. Also, calling someone who is fully playing by the rules and idiot, is pretty idiotic in itself.

Please provide evidence of your academic qualifications that are superior to those of Dr. Holohan, that I may disregard his advice in favour of yours.

Honestly it's like the karens commenting on Dublin Live.

On a separate note: it is estimated that the propulation of Dublin City will increase 60,000 between now and 2026. Say 10,000 per year between now and then. There were 1,800 housing completions in the city in 2019 (with no signs of that picking up), so unless all the new residents live 6 people to a dwelling, then the housing crisis will get worse.

Ray Palmer wrote: »

No I am not. They are working on a reduced capacity. There is no restaurant in Dublin that I am aware of that has toilets where social distancing can be achieved.
There are loads of idiots refusing to wear masks on public transport too. Even if it is the majority of people being stupid they remain stupid.

Well luckily for us all, you are not in charge.

I ate at a local restaurant last week. No issue with social distancing. Masks worn by staff and no crowding in the toilets.

Lock yourself up, by all means thats your prerogative, but being abusive to people who are following the rules just makes you sound like an angry loon who needs to get out more....

Ray Palmer wrote: »

No, you asked if you were stupid and I answered there is the difference.

You have since explained that following the minimum advice and anybody going beyond that is stupid. Not sure why the minimum became best practice. If you interact with people at risk or live with them you certainly need to above and beyond the minimum.

The cop on and exercised judgment you think you have is limited because you think minimum is the highest standard. It isn't.

Nope, I asked if it made me an idiot and you said yes. I said the feeling is mutual, which i think is fair comment and further justified by your subsequent posts.

And no, they are not a minimum standard - they are the standard. There are no gold stars for total isolation. Actually there are a lot of downsides to not living a normal life - social isolation, mental health struggles, poverty etc. We do not need to all lock ourselves away.

Also, you've stated that you're not going to go to a bar or restaurant for the rest of the year. Thats almost 6 months away, there is no need to make sweeping proclamations about the situation months from now. We could be in another wave or we could have a vaccine and/or more effective treatment.

I am following the advice as the situation evolves, and not making rash statements.

SozBbz wrote: »

Nope, I asked if it made me an idiot and you said yes. I said the feeling is mutual, which i think is fair comment and further justified by your subsequent posts.

And no, they are not a minimum standard - they are the standard. There are no gold stars for total isolation. Actually there are a lot of downsides to not living a normal life - social isolation, mental health struggles, poverty etc. We do not need to all lock ourselves away.

Also, you've stated that you're not going to go to a bar or restaurant for the rest of the year. Thats almost 6 months away, there is no need to make sweeping proclamations about the situation months from now. We could be in another wave or we could have a vaccine and/or more effective treatment.

I am following the advice as the situation evolves, and not making rash statements.

You called me stupid just for disagreeing with you while I stated a stupid act. You asked me if that made you stupid and I answered in the affirmative. You therefore called me stupid with no logic and call me stupid for maintaining my view.you are moving goal posts while I didn't. Don't ask a question if you aren't going to like the answer


No it is the minimum. They have stated it as such by telling some if the population to remain locked down as much as possible.

There will be no vaccine this year available to the public. It is literally impossible.

You are picking and choosing what to follow and have stated you will use your judgment. Your judgement is off and lacks critical thinking. The idea that you can social distance in these places is false just on toilets alone. You want to take the risk go ahead but don't claim something is possible where it is not.

SozBbz wrote: »

I think you're conflating what you think with what other people think.

You're clearly wearing the rose-tinted glasses here.
Running any numbers at all as a business owner, it's impossible not to see turnover dropping, going forward. And then taking the hit on 4 months lost revenue.
The people going back to pubs, for instance, are the party animals, binge drinkers, young, barflies etc etc. Even if your common sense social drinker only makes up 10-15% of your turnover, buying rounds etc (or not), that's a devastating turnover hit.
This is simple maths. The knock-on effects of this will be horrendous. Pent-up demand, my backside.

ZeroThreat wrote: »

Hmmm, if average take home pay in this country works out at above €720 a week, I really need to find a better job....

That would be €683.80 a week net.

Average full time gross per year is €47,596. Tax is levied at 20% on the first 35k, and 40% on everything after so (35k-20%)=28,000 and then(47596-35000)=12,596 to be taxed at 40% which leaves you at 7,557.6

7,557.6 + 28,000 = 35,557.6 net per anum divided by 12 is €2,963.13 per month, or if you get paid weekly, divide by 52: €683.80 net a week

Deleted User wrote: »

We're heading for a deep recession.

What is known about how this affects property prices and rents? Both will fall, but which falls first and fastest?

Looks like property prices have dropped 1st and rents are up?

See link to interesting article in Irish Indo below


https://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-prices-fell-by-over-3pc-in-june-but-tenants-paying-even-higher-rents-39349542.html

Rent levels and property prices tend to track each other. Changes in rents tend to
begun apparent more quickly. Rent deals are negotiated and completed within days (in most cases). House prices are negotiated and concluded over several months. As a result, changes don't appear in the statistics for quite some time. Because of the rent cap, some rents may increase by 4% if there below market levels already, whereas newly negotiated rents may be less that would have been the case previously.

cgcsb wrote: »

:rolleyes:

lighten up there Karen.

Post reported. It's easy to spot someone with skin in the game. And an online coward who ridicules a current Irish citizen who's mentally ill. You're dirt.
Me, I've skin in the game too. 2k made on gold since May. Stick that where the sun don't shine, in your cobwebbed head.

An Ri rua wrote: »

Post reported. It's easy to spot someone with skin in the game. And an online coward who ridicules a current Irish citizen who's mentally ill. You're dirt.
Me, I've skin in the game too. 2k made on gold since May. Stick that where the sun don't shine, in your cobwebbed head.

What are you actually talking about?

An Ri rua wrote: »

Correction. You're still all those things except I recalled a recent online bully victim as Karen, whereas she's not. Back to your soft landing calculator lad.

Geeeez this thread is out of control.

You're the one who just called someone dirt.