Future price of Irish properties

Status
Not open for further replies.
Things I have heard about the market are quite funny some times. I know a few people who commonly use the last known guide price for a road as how much the property went for. THen when a second property comes up and the offer price is less or more they use that to indicate prices. If they then hear an actual price they claim a huge rise. The misunderstanding of the fact some estate agents use a higher or lower % on the guide to drum up bussiness is ignored.
I know from experience that it can be very difficult to find out what a house sold for. Hearing it throught the grapevine can also be dead wrong. How are people finding out the prices houses went for?
If you are looking to spent 317k you need to look at houses under offer at 290k and maybe lower. A lot of people don't beleive this and get very frustrated with the market. I also know a lot of people that would sacrifice travele distance to do no DIY on the house too. You have got to admit high expectations are part of the problem too as people move further out for "better" value and then wonder why nothing else is there.
 
I meant to ask this the other day. What effect do you think the shootings in areas have on property? Coolock had two heavily reported shootings in the last few weeks.
Clontarf had one too but I doubt that would have an effect as Coolock had a really bad name before anyway and it was local people involved.
 
Loki said:
I meant to ask this the other day. What effect do you think the shootings in areas have on property? Coolock had two heavily reported shootings in the last few weeks.
Clontarf had one too but I doubt that would have an effect as Coolock had a really bad name before anyway and it was local people involved.
Click to expand...

Hmm I think the lower tone of the area might push houses from 12 times average gross salaries to say, 11.9999999. But that's just my opinion and I base it on absolutely no evidence whatsoever. Although, you just might get a more positive spin if you ask someone who makes a living selling houses.

But of course any dip in price is just an opportunity to "buy in for the long-term" cos eventually only 0.00001% of the population will have enough salary to actually afford a house cos "prices always go up in the long-term" and "ah sure, renting is dead money" etc.

I say ta hell with the crime level and buy now or "you'll never get yerself on the ladder".

Et cetera
 
Any agent will be pricing ahead of the last comparable sale in this market. Like I say I’m seeing about 23% increase yoy in a sample estate about 20 miles from Dublin; much of this increase coming in the last two to three months. SSIA’s, rate tightening and a rush of buyers looking to buy before they are priced out forever are driving the market presently. I believe that the market is consuming future demand in a short hectic highly competitive buying period.

I guess that I’ll see prices rise in my sample area by as much as 30% before the end of the year. Yields are, needless to say, falling, the accidental investor seems to becoming more prevalent, i.e. a buyers retaining their previous home and using equity to purchase a new home. No doubt we’ll see a renewed interest from the investment market when the magnitude of the boom seeps into the collective consciousness, adding to the frenzy.

Over the next few months we will hear and read growing signs of unease in the media, emanating from commentators and politicians. The banks will continue to assuage concerns by reference to their predictions of continued mass immigration and future economic growth.



"A sound banker, alas, is not one who foresees danger and avoids it, but one who, when he is ruined, is ruined in a conventional and orthodox way, along with his fellows, so that no one can really blame him".
- John Maynard Keynes
 
Duplex said:
Any agent will be pricing ahead of the last comparable sale in this market. Like I say I’m seeing about 23% increase yoy in a sample estate about 20 miles from Dublin; much of this increase coming in the last two to three months. SSIA’s, rate tightening and a rush of buyers looking to buy before they are priced out forever are driving the market presently. I believe that the market is consuming future demand in a short hectic highly competitive buying period.

I guess that I’ll see prices rise in my sample area by as much as 30% before the end of the year.
Click to expand...
From my experience estate agents certainly do not price ahead of the market based on the last price. Some agents guide price below the expected and others above. I have seen houses on the same road and the same design vary 25k (10%) between agents and then sell well above both asking and I beleive very similar prices but it's hard to find out.

How are you finding out the actual selling price?

I would like to see this data available to everybody as I think it would control the market as people wouldn't rely on estate agents (vested interest) on the value of property. IN the US I have friends who can look at the prices all houses have gone for in the last 20 years. Very easy to tell estimate yourself what your house is worth.
 
It would be nice to have a Multiple Listings Service in Ireland similar to the States, but transparency in any market runs contrary to ‘professional’ interests. Prices increase because a premium is attached to previous transaction evidence (however nebulous), in a market where demand exceeds supply.
 
I have been watching 4 separate properties in Cork over the last month ...each of them are currently on offer for greater than 10% of the original asking price right now. In most of these cases there is still a bidding war going on. An Auctioneer I know was also telling me that he had 5 people bidding on one particular property this week alone... he was like a trader in Wall Street..... an offer was no sonner upped & someone else was bettering it each time)

To emphasise on a prev post.... most of these bids are done on one 10 min viewing & then there is a must have... (must be all the money floating around Cork at the moment as a result of the pyramid schemes :rolleyes: )

ninsaga
 
I think there is a lack of quality homes out there. Pre high density legistation houses with gardens are the ones generating the highest interest. I think the higer density houses are being snapped up by FTB and noob investors, lower density houses, by people trading up. I though the Government was moving away from the Ballymun type planning.
 
ninsaga said:
To emphasise on a prev post.... most of these bids are done on one 10 min viewing & then there is a must have... (must be all the money floating around Cork at the moment as a result of the pyramid schemes :rolleyes: )

ninsaga
Click to expand...

I think that is really unfair to say and highly dubious how you would know this. Most people do a lot of research on an area before looking at a house in the first place. After looking for a while you know what type of house you want. If you focus on areas you tend to see a lot of repeats of design so views are generally an inspection of the particulars of that house which is really superficial. People are not buying on this inspection but a surveyors report.
I am speaking from experience of looking at property and been involved in buy over 6 houses.
redo said:
I though the Government was moving away from the Ballymun type planning.
Click to expand...

Ballymun failed not because of the building but bad management of tenants. Families could insist on a house and as a result many vacant units existed and as the families wouldn't move in the lower people on the lists were moved in. That meant many people with social problem (junkies, menatlly ill, alcoholics) were moved in making a bad situation worse.

The dislike of high rise whether founded are not compounded with the ability to get a house (in the early days) meant people living there hated the place.

Private housing in high density is a completely different model IMHO. I do think there will be problems but not to the extent of Ballymun. The Ballymun towers had very large places (3 beds) a lot bigger than modern builds, central underfloor heating so actually in a way better built than today.

I mean no offense to either of you but some people are talking about a property market with little or no experience and no history of the market. You could be just generalising but they are quite a deal more complex than you are saying. How long have/were you looking?
 
redo said:
I think there is a lack of quality homes out there. Pre high density legistation houses with gardens are the ones generating the highest interest. I think the higer density houses are being snapped up by FTB and noob investors, lower density houses, by people trading up. I though the Government was moving away from the Ballymun type planning.
Click to expand...

theres nothing intrinsically wrong with high density,see america uk europe japan,it makes sense to have high density in cities to facilitate services and public transport.we have one sixth the density of england and i dont see any lack of green space and houses with gardens there.
 
Loki said:
Ballymun failed not because of the building but bad management of tenants. Families could insist on a house and as a result many vacant units existed and as the families wouldn't move in the lower people on the lists were moved in. That meant many people with social problem (junkies, menatlly ill, alcoholics) were moved in making a bad situation worse.

The dislike of high rise whether founded are not compounded with the ability to get a house (in the early days) meant people living there hated the place.

Private housing in high density is a completely different model IMHO. I do think there will be problems but not to the extent of Ballymun. The Ballymun towers had very large places (3 beds) a lot bigger than modern builds, central underfloor heating so actually in a way better built than today.

I mean no offense to either of you but some people are talking about a property market with little or no experience and no history of the market. You could be just generalising but they are quite a deal more complex than you are saying. How long have/were you looking?
Click to expand...

I'm not really entering into the failure/success element per se but rather when the Government took the Ballymun towers down they did mention the need to get awat from high density / high rise developments. However I am not sure in which context this was meant, ie Social housing or housing in general.
 
bearishbull said:
theres nothing intrinsically wrong with high density,see america uk europe japan,it makes sense to have high density in cities to facilitate services and public transport.we have one sixth the density of england and i dont see any lack of green space and houses with gardens there.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Maybe I should have been more specific, meaning high density in the burbs. Most new (and affordable) developments contain a mixture of apartments and duplexes. In my humble option, these dwellings are "entry level" properties, and as said above, it is precisely the opposite types of houses, second hand with (any size) gardens, that are the focus of large bidding wars and exceeding the asking prices.

When the time comes for these recent and current purchasers to trade up, to larger homes, the situation could get even worse. FTB buyers of these low density homes could be a thing of the past (maybe similar to period homes).
 
redo said:
I'm not really entering into the failure/success element per se but rather when the Government took the Ballymun towers down they did mention the need to get awat from high density / high rise developments. However I am not sure in which context this was meant, ie Social housing or housing in general.
Click to expand...
The government say anything that is popular and sound bite like. I think either way that is certainly the government talking from both sides of their mouth.
redo said:
In my humble option, these dwellings are "entry level" properties, and as said above, it is precisely the opposite types of houses, second hand with (any size) gardens, that are the focus of large bidding wars and exceeding the asking prices.
Click to expand...

I still not sure why people keep using the asking price (guide price really) as proof of some crazy bidding war. The guide price is not what people expect to sell the house for in fact they will probably not sell th ehouse for anything less than 110% of the guide price. It's fundemental of what the price means now.
 
redo said:
When the time comes for these recent and current purchasers to trade up, to larger homes, the situation could get even worse. FTB buyers of these low density homes could be a thing of the past (maybe similar to period homes).
Click to expand...
An interesting point, i could never understand the rush for high density in this country. Perhaps in some city areas granted but in the suburbs it's absurd to cram in hundreds of duplexs/apartments to a site surrounded by tens of thousands of hectares of green field.

Naturally ftbs don't mind since they figure they won't be living there any length of time.

To my mind it's the ftbs that are driving the market and they (not even the amateur investor/speculators) are the ones that will bail out fastest when growth stalls.

We chatted about this last night and of the dozen or so people we know personally who've bought as ftbs none see themselves in those properties in 5 years time, in fact most plan to 'cash in' in 3 years or less.

This is the worry, while we talk about investors in the market the simple fact is almost every ftb buying today is doing so as an investment not as a home.
 
Eurofan said:
An interesting point, i could never understand the rush for high density in this country. Perhaps in some city areas granted but in the suburbs it's absurd to cram in hundreds of duplexs/apartments to a site surrounded by tens of thousands of hectares of green field.

Naturally ftbs don't mind since they figure they won't be living there any length of time.

To my mind it's the ftbs that are driving the market and they (not even the amateur investor/speculators) are the ones that will bail out fastest when growth stalls.

We chatted about this last night and of the dozen or so people we know personally who've bought as ftbs none see themselves in those properties in 5 years time, in fact most plan to 'cash in' in 3 years or less.

This is the worry, while we talk about investors in the market the simple fact is almost every ftb buying today is doing so as an investment not as a home.
Click to expand...

As an investment for a deposit on a better home. But when the time comes for them to trade up, they will be swamped with the competition. You could even see gazumping on the second hand market raise its ugly head.
 
Loki said:
......I mean no offense to either of you.....
Click to expand...

........none taken Loki

I can say for sure on the houses that I have been tracking over the last few weeks the majority of the bids were done based upon 1 viewing. I was discssing this with ann auctioneer I know who echoed this.

Granted...these do not go to 'sold' status until accessed by a surveyor of course.

ninsaga
 
redo said:
As an investment for a deposit on a better home. But when the time comes for them to trade up, they will be swamped with the competition.
Click to expand...
I'm thinking more of the problems that will transpire when the required double digit growth doesn't appear that they need to pull off the trade-up.

The standard of the vast majority of starter homes that i've seen is very poor (and that's being generous). Imagine suddenly realizing after being there a few years that far from making a killing by now and 'moving on up' that if you tried to sell today you'd be lucky to cover your costs to date. So what now? Stay for years more in an area/property that you was supposed to be a 'starter' home or try to bail out quickly when you're not going to lose out.

The so-called 'soft-landing' that many are hoping for will create the above scenario in many many first home owners lives.

You're then left with future ftbs... why would they 'invest' such huge sums of money into such a property when there's little or no growth in the market?

Hence i don't really believe there can be a soft landing at least not in the lower end of the market, and since it's they that are largely supporting the boom the ramifications will be felt at all levels.

As things slow the first group who realise that they're having difficulty shifting the property they 'invested' in 2 or 3 years ago with a decent profit will silently drop their asking price rather than be stuck in a 'starter' home they don't want to be in.

It wouldn't take much for that to snowball...
 
Eurofan said:
The standard of the vast majority of starter homes that i've seen is very poor (and that's being generous). Imagine suddenly realizing after being there a few years that far from making a killing by now and 'moving on up' that if you tried to sell today you'd be lucky to cover your costs to date. So what now? Stay for years more in an area/property that you was supposed to be a 'starter' home or try to bail out quickly when you're not going to lose out.
Click to expand...
A key question for me when looking at properties is this "In the event of unforeseen problems, is it such a big deal to be living here for five or ten years, or more, or, am I going to grow out of this property in a shorter term than that?" I really think a lot of people aren't actually honestly considering that question. Otherwise no one would be buying the fiascos otherwise known as one bedroomed apartments. I'm convinced many of them are designed by people who are absolutely safe in the knowledge that they will never, ever have to live in them.

Interesting that you suggest that problems will start at entry level. The last article I read on France, where they're rather concerned about their property market, suggested that problems would start from the top...but that entry level property would hold its value for a little while longer. They're more or less expecting a crash because a crash has historically followed record numbers of new builds and they're at that stage now.
 
Just a note on that central register of house prices idea... I know for a fact it's law in Holland, part of the land registry and transfer of deeds process, that the price of the house (and land/ leasehold) is put on a published register. It's now available online (can't find the site right now).

Does anyone see this being enforced Europe-wide as part of competition/ fairness law, or are there too many vested interests in keeping it under wraps?

Would having such a register help have a calming effect on the house prices, or would it, in effect, aid the bidding war as people log in, find the last price of the house and go 'OK I'll bid at +5% of that and I'll be sure to have it'

MS
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top