Dublin property prices falling by €4,500 a month

[Cael]

20% of Ireland's wealth is controlled by just 1% of the population. http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusiness ... 0706.shtml

Terrible, isn't it?

It sure is.

Have a look at the article on Japan, the worlds richest country, on the same page. 33% of the workforce in part time jobs. An average wage of only 2700 dollers a month. If the Irish people dont develop a back bone and use their strength, the Irish gombeens will soon have them in the same position. Of course, they just voted for another five years of being screwed, so I dont know how hopeful I would be.

[meriwether]

The market is soaring- time to get the hell out of anglo.
The counter states they are 13.25, so g'luck.

[returning officer]

Then you will be shocked to learn that since Q42006, the average asking price on Daft has increased from €320K to €449k.

Could you provide a link to this that actually works, thanks.

If true, it would suggest that a very significant number of larger homes have come to the market, thus skewing the figures. I can't believe that you would still attempt to deny that there is a serious problem in the Irish property market.

http://www.daft.ie/report/DaftReport-Q42006.pdf
http://www.daft.ie/report/DaftReport-Q22007.pdf
These should work (page 6).
EDIT: the €449k must be a typo for €349K as a two bed apartment is €415K. (D'oh!)


I would accept your first point entirely: this thread was an offshoot from a previous thread that followed publication of the the daft report in Q32006. I made the very point at the time, that apartment figures are skewed by the size, quality and location of new developments. The above figures show that over 5 quarters the asking prices are relatively stable - which given that new developments are more price sensitive, puts a lie to the thread title.

The problems in the property market are:-
- people who cannot afford repayments are struggling to pay mortgages following interest rises (however, some can still pay for 2 holidays and run two cars);
- morons who bought as owner/occupiers with 100% interest only or 40 year mortgages;
- people who bought in locations which have poor infastructure and have to commute up to two hours per day;
- people bought property which was simply of poor quality.
- amateur investers thought that they could make a few quid by jumping on the bandwagon.
- people who got themselves mortgaged to the hilt buying a trophy houses, the "value" of which bore no resemblance to any reality but simply adopted a measurement of rising tide relativism.

My view is very straightforward: if you bought a property, which is in a good location (eg in or near Dublin CC), even if it is small (say a one bed apartment) and it is well built, with some equity, with the intention of staying for a while, that even if you bought at the peak - there is no problem at all.

If you bought a property which is affected by the any of the problems above, one should be concerned, particulay if one bought since May, 2006. So there is a very serious problem with these markets.

However, nearly 78% of property owners are owner/occupiers.
The demand for Dublin properties is not met by supply.
Demographics and population factors are favourable.
Growth rates of 3-4.5% is good by EU standards.
Employment is expected to continue to rise (albeit at a slower rate).
Government spending will have to be adjusted (again).


If banks take a hit from reckless specuvestors, not many tears will be shed.
Returning to a sustainable figures for new developments (eg 50-70000) is not a bad thing (unless one is a builder, developer or breakfast roll maker).


But spare us Sunday Independent stories that run along the lines of "A house seller told me privately that its a disaster out there...". Or someone being shocked about a €20,000 drop in the "value" of their property, when at no stage does it say that they intended to sell - if they intended to re-mortgage then they have been lucky.

The doom and gloom come from drops in average figures from the peak. How else could that be good news? (Unless one intends being a property owner/occupier in the next 24 months as the relationship between income and property narrows).

If people made poor investment choices (even if it their own home) it is their own fault. If there is a problem with the development, they should sue the builder. If they were missold mortgage products (eg 100%IO, 40 years) perhaps they should go to the Financial Ombudsman. If they want better amenities, start engaging with the local politicians before 2009.

But I don't know which is worse, the whingers themselves or those trading on their misery (it is no difficulty in choosing between FINFACTS, even written by a vested interest but which contains verifiable, objective facts which are (mis)used to make widely optimistic predictions and the SINDO
on any weekend, on any page and that includes the articles which contradicts the others).

Cutting out the estate agent bluff, the report (dated 2006) states, inter aliaL

A new report on the housing market published by estate agents Hooke & MacDonald highlights the fact that the number of new residential units granted planning permission dropped by a massive 45% in Dublin during 2005, from 24,196 units in 2004 to just 13,233, with the biggest shortfalls being in Dublin City Centre and South Dublin.

The biggest supply shortfall is in Dublin, where there is currently demand for 26,000 new homes, yet only 18,000 completions are forecast for the City and County this year.

The dearth of activity in the Capital is highlighted by the fact that housing output in Dublin only accounts for 21% of the national total, despite the fact that almost 30% of the population resides in the Capital.


It states that the level of inconsistency between the local authorities and An Bord Pleanála is a cause of serious concern, which needs to be addressed immediately. An average of one-in-three recent decisions by the Board overturned the decision of the local authority.

Earlier research by Hooke & MacDonald estimates there is only enough land in Dublin City Centre, between the canals, for another six years housing supply based on current planning policies.

First-time buyers are the main drivers of demand in the new homes market, accounting for 48% of purchasers, followed by other owner-occupiers at 24% and investors at 28%.

The report shows that over half of all new homes purchased in Dublin during 2005 were under €350,000 and approximately 30% were less than €300,000.



So let's see how the market diverges further between now and Spring, 2008.

[Cael]

[quote=returning officer][quote=Coles][quote="returning officer":hzenfbm7]Then you will be shocked to learn that since Q42006, the average asking price on Daft has increased from €320K to €449k.[/quote] Could you provide a link to this that actually works, thanks.

[i][b]If[/b][/i] true, it would suggest that a very significant number of larger homes have come to the market, thus skewing the figures. I can't believe that you would still attempt to deny that there is a serious problem in the Irish property market.[/quote]

[url="http://www.daft.ie/report/DaftReport-Q42006.pdf"]http://www.daft.ie/report/DaftReport-Q42006.pdf[/url]
http://www.daft.ie/report/DaftReport-Q22007.pdf
These should work (page 6).
EDIT: the €449k must be a typo for €349K as a two bed apartment is €415K. (D'oh!)


I would accept your first point entirely: this thread was an offshoot from a previous thread that followed publication of the the daft report in Q32006. I made the very point at the time, that apartment figures are skewed by the size, quality and location of new developments. The above figures show that over 5 quarters the asking prices are relatively stable - which given that new developments are more price sensitive, puts a lie to the thread title.

The problems in the property market are:-
- people who cannot afford repayments are struggling to pay mortgages following interest rises (however, some can still pay for 2 holidays and run two cars);
- morons who bought as owner/occupiers with 100% interest only or 40 year mortgages;
- people who bought in locations which have poor infastructure and have to commute up to two hours per day;
- people bought property which was simply of poor quality.
- amateur investers thought that they could make a few quid by jumping on the bandwagon.
- people who got themselves mortgaged to the hilt buying a trophy houses, the "value" of which bore no resemblance to any reality but simply adopted a measurement of rising tide relativism.

My view is very straightforward: if you bought a property, which is in a good location (eg in or near Dublin CC), even if it is small (say a one bed apartment) and it is well built, with some equity, with the intention of staying for a while, that even if you bought at the peak - there is no problem at all.

If you bought a property which is affected by the any of the problems above, one should be concerned, particulay if one bought since May, 2006. So there is a very serious problem with these markets.

However, nearly 78% of property owners are owner/occupiers.
The demand for Dublin properties is not met by supply.
Demographics and population factors are favourable.
Growth rates of 3-4.5% is good by EU standards.
Employment is expected to continue to rise (albeit at a slower rate).
Government spending will have to be adjusted (again).


If banks take a hit from reckless specuvestors, not many tears will be shed.
Returning to a sustainable figures for new developments (eg 50-70000) is not a bad thing (unless one is a builder, developer or breakfast roll maker).


But spare us Sunday Independent stories that run along the lines of "A house seller told me privately that its a disaster out there...". Or someone being shocked about a €20,000 drop in the "value" of their property, when at no stage does it say that they intended to sell - if they intended to re-mortgage then they have been lucky.

The doom and gloom come from drops in average figures from the peak. How else could that be good news? (Unless one intends being a property owner/occupier in the next 24 months as the relationship between income and property narrows).

If people made poor investment choices (even if it their own home) it is their own fault. If there is a problem with the development, they should sue the builder. If they were missold mortgage products (eg 100%IO, 40 years) perhaps they should go to the Financial Ombudsman. If they want better amenities, start engaging with the local politicians before 2009.

But I don't know which is worse, the whingers themselves or those trading on their misery (it is no difficulty in choosing between FINFACTS, even written by a vested interest but which contains verifiable, objective facts which are (mis)used to make widely optimistic predictions and the SINDO
on any weekend, on any page and that includes the articles which contradicts the others).

Cutting out the estate agent bluff, the report (dated 2006) states, inter aliaL

A new report on the housing market published by estate agents Hooke & MacDonald highlights the fact that the number of new residential units granted planning permission dropped by a massive 45% in Dublin during 2005, from 24,196 units in 2004 to just 13,233, with the biggest shortfalls being in Dublin City Centre and South Dublin.

The biggest supply shortfall is in Dublin, where there is currently demand for 26,000 new homes, yet only 18,000 completions are forecast for the City and County this year.

The dearth of activity in the Capital is highlighted by the fact that housing output in Dublin only accounts for 21% of the national total, despite the fact that almost 30% of the population resides in the Capital.


It states that the level of inconsistency between the local authorities and An Bord Pleanála is a cause of serious concern, which needs to be addressed immediately. An average of one-in-three recent decisions by the Board overturned the decision of the local authority.

Earlier research by Hooke & MacDonald estimates there is only enough land in Dublin City Centre, between the canals, for another six years housing supply based on current planning policies.

First-time buyers are the main drivers of demand in the new homes market, accounting for 48% of purchasers, followed by other owner-occupiers at 24% and investors at 28%.

The report shows that over half of all new homes purchased in Dublin during 2005 were under €350,000 and approximately 30% were less than €300,000.



So let's see how the market diverges further between now and Spring, 2008.[/quote:hzenfbm7]


You know the average person does not buy a "property" or an "investment", they buy a home, because they and their loved ones need somewhere to live in.

[returning officer]

You know the average person does not buy a "property" or an "investment", they buy a home, because they and their loved ones need somewhere to live in.

Finally, a post which makes sense on this thread.
Yes, 78% of people do just that. But for some reason there is a massive focus on the 16% or so who are "investers". I don't see why I should have any greater sympathy for this 16% than eircom speculators or losers in the 3.40 in Ballybrit.

[Cael]

You know the average person does not buy a "property" or an "investment", they buy a home, because they and their loved ones need somewhere to live in.

Finally, a post which makes sense on this thread.
Yes, 78% of people do just that. But for some reason there is a massive focus on the 16% or so who are "investers". I don't see why I should have any greater sympathy for this 16% than eircom speculators or losers in the 3.40 in Ballybrit.

The problem is, a chara, that a lot of that 78% have been forced to pay massively overinflated prices for their small homes. Prices which bear no relation whatsoever to the fact that Ireland is only 4% urbanised.

[returning officer]

The problem is, a chara, that a lot of that 78% have been forced to pay massively overinflated prices for their small homes. Prices which bear no relation whatsoever to the fact that Ireland is only 4% urbanised.

It's the "forced" bit I have difficulty with. Renting was, and remains an option. A price is simply what two people agree on. In modern times this has become a "property value".

For completeness sake, the changes in asking prices for one-beds in Dublin since Q42005 are as follows
€000s City Centre Nth City Sth City
Q4 2005 262 315 307
Q1 2006 323 294 305
Q2 2006 345 313 334
Q3 2006 317 293 339
Q4 2006 320 302 311
Q1 2007 317 302 329
Q2 2007 449 (sic) 302 329

Av 319* 303 322

Taking the q22007 as 349
It was the "drop" between Q22006 and Q32006 in North City apartments of €19,000 that gave rise to this thread title.
The q to q deviations demonstrate (IMHO) skews on location, quality and size, rather than fundamental "value" which is relatively stable.

[Cael]

The problem is, a chara, that a lot of that 78% have been forced to pay massively overinflated prices for their small homes. Prices which bear no relation whatsoever to the fact that Ireland is only 4% urbanised.

It's the "forced" bit I have difficulty with. Renting was, and remains an option. A price is simply what two people agree on. In modern times this has become a "property value".

For completeness sake, the changes in asking prices for one-beds in Dublin since Q42005 are as follows
€000s City Centre Nth City Sth City
Q4 2005 262 315 307
Q1 2006 323 294 305
Q2 2006 345 313 334
Q3 2006 317 293 339
Q4 2006 320 302 311
Q1 2007 317 302 329
Q2 2007 449 (sic) 302 329

Av 319* 303 322

Taking the q22007 as 349
It was the "drop" between Q22006 and Q32006 in North City apartments of €19,000 that gave rise to this thread title.
The q to q deviations demonstrate (IMHO) skews on location, quality and size, rather than fundamental "value" which is relatively stable.

Renting is not a real option for most Irish people. Besides money down the drain, and the low level of protection for tenants compared to other European countries, Irish people have too much of a folk memory of living under landlords to ever want to do it again. If I need a home and a small gombeen cartel - with the full connivance of Fianna Fáil - has forced the prices up to insane levels (quite a feat in a country 4% urbanised), then I still need a home and am forced to pay their thieving prices.

[Akrasia]

there is also a big problem with renting in that there are often so many conditions attached that prevent you from enjoying your home. 'No Pets' 'No Smoking' 'No Parties' 'No Structural changes' (including drilling a hole in the wall to decorate or install appliances)

And Irish tenents can be thrown out of the house at very short notice if the landlord decides that he wants to sell it or doesn't like you for some reason.

[returning officer]

Yeah yeah yeah rent is dead money yeah the Private Residential Tenacy Act has had no effect yeah Irish don't like renting since the famine yeah yeah yeah, and it is the fault of
banks
estate agents
FF
PDs
Developers
Solicitors
anyone who has ever been to Ballybrit
The Brits..if it wasn''t for that damned famine, landlordism, the infliction of a native merchant class and the fear of the dispossessed, we would be fine.

If all of the above is correct, then I find it amazing that some owner/occpiers choose to rent their homes from the banks (or using 100% IO mortages as they are more popurlarily called).

EDIT
More bad news for renters (they're up 11%):

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mhcwkfmhgbsn/

And how will this continued trend affect the demand for purchase of housing in the long term (say over life of a normal mortgage)? http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mhcwkfmhqlcw/


Anyway to those who did make good and timely choices in the purchase of their homes or other investments, enjoy the summer, to the others best of luck in Autumn.