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.
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.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.
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)
ninsaga
redo said:I though the Government was moving away from the Ballymun type planning.
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.
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?
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.
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: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.
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.
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.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).
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.
Loki said:......I mean no offense to either of you.....
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.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.
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.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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?