Future Shock: Property Crash


I didn't think it was trash journalism.

It dealt effectively with three main risks to the property market, but it did go a bit tabloid with the hypothetical crash landing, which they did say was how it *might* play out. Those quick to dismiss this program seem to be claiming that 1.70 to the euro was a prediction - it wasn't.
 

lol. How many of these academics, who are home owners, are going to practice what they preach and sell their homes to benefit from their predictions ? When I 'm bullish about an asset I'm long of it when I'm bearish I short it !
 
I was half expecting to wake up today to find my foreign owned company telling me my I was too expensive so they are moving to Poland, my house taken off me and my wife running off to Spain to retire with the plumber.
 
demoivre said:
lol. How many of these academics, who are home owners, are going to practice what they preach and sell their homes to benefit from their predictions ? When I 'm bullish about an asset I'm long of it when I'm bearish I short it !
Click to expand...

Cos its their home first, an asset second.

Actually, how many banks are buying up new property for branch networks/headquarters, or how many estate agents are expanding rather than selling up?

Seriously - you're calling into question the motives of individuals who have nothing at stake except their reputations. And yet somehow that seems to be less palatable to you than believing a salesman whose employer is overseeing mass exploitation of the young people of this country for their own profit.

Yeah, you're right. Maybe we shouldn't believe people who have no profit to be made from the advice they dish out.
 
Vanilla said:
I was listening to George Lee on Turbridy this am. He said when the banks found out this programme was being made they 'put the word out' to people not to participate. How did they do that, I wonder?
Click to expand...

The message obviously didn't reach Ulster Bank's Pat McArdle. He was one of the people interviewed.
 
KalEl said:
I thought it was reasonable enough until the "fast forward bit" at the end...then it descended into tabloid farce.
Click to expand...

This would be my sentiments exactly. Was like watching Blair Witch in parts. I noticed that it was in the 'RTE Factual' bracket in the credits, but was mainly trying to use a domino effect of future potential issues to create its core message.

Still, it was hard not to keep watching.

Unless I'm incorrect, Clonee was the only localiesd area mentioned in relation to recognised falls thus far, which was perhaps a bit unfair, even if its true. But i guess they couldn't cover everywhere.
 
Prime Time did a follow up with Prof Kelly from UCD & Jim Power from Friends First. I have never seen a property bull so rattled on TV in Ireland before. Maybe last nights program has had a bigger effect than I thought.
 
beattie said:
Prime Time did a follow up with Prof Kelly from UCD & Jim Power from Friends First. I have never seen a property bull so rattled on TV in Ireland before. Maybe last nights program has had a bigger effect than I thought.
Click to expand...

I would totally disagree with you there.
Jim Power made his points clearly and eloquently. Professor Kelly was merely ranting that there's never been a boom without a bust and the Arizona comparison was ridiculous. Arizona is a holiday/retirement area which got a bad name for attracting a dodgy element.
Power made great points...an increase in employment from 1 million to 2 million, 1 million people aged 25-35 creating a natural demand etc etc. And his debunking of the programme's "scenarios" was fair enough.
 
KalEl said:
. Professor Kelly was merely ranting that there's never been a boom without a bust .
Click to expand...

Merely ranting? He said that he investigated many markets which had a bubble like ours and looked and what happened afterwards. I would hope that a Professor employed at one of our top universities would do more than 'rant' when he is trying to make a point on something he has researched.
 

Sorry, I was referring more to his delivery which is to be expected...after all he is a university academic and Jim Power is a polished performer used to appearing on television.
I just think Power came across better...was impressed with his annoyance at the suggestion he had a vested interest also.
 
The debate between Kelly and Power is what was missing from the programme last night. Have the two conflicting views expressed and challenged simultaneously.

That is what I have been trying to get someone to do on Askaboutmoney for months without success. People don't seem to be interested in assessing the evidence and arriving at a result. They decide that property is going to rise or property is going to fall and then collect the evidence.

I wonder if the Kelly and Power debate had been planned or was it a result of the criticism of the one sided presentation last night?

Brendan
 
I will remind people that this is not a free for all discussion of property prices - it should be limited to the programme last night and follow up today.

I have had to remove a lot of off topic posts from this thread.

brendan
 

The debate tonight was great television...they were actually looking at each other with contempt, each believing the other was talking complete nonsense. I'm just not convinced that stating that something has never happened before is a strong argument against it happening.
 

Yes you have a point about the respective appearances, but the incredulous and exasperated look on Jim Power's face when Prof Kelly was mentioning some stat or another was quite telling IMO. In the past when other property bulls have been on such programs they have never had reactions like that (well the ones I have seen anyway).

I wouldn't totally believe Jim Powers assertion that he isn't a cheerleader for the property boom. Friends First will indirectly make money from clients who have done well from it.
 
beattie said:
I wouldn't totally believe Jim Powers assertion that he isn't a cheerleader for the property boom. Friends First will indirectly make money from clients who have done well from it.
Click to expand...

It's a regular jibe used by people who are negative about Irish property...you could see he was deeply offended by it and rightly so.
It's basically an accusation of dishonesty.
I just saw Power being able to give reasons x, y, and z all of which are true to support his belief that we wouldn't see a crash. Kelly's didn't deny those statistics, he just kept repeating that in the past there's always been crashes.
Fascinating to see such diametrically opposed viewpoints...they disagreed fundamentally with each other, both incredulous at the other.
 

He didn't seem very sure footed when the presenter (Mark Little?) quizzed him about the yields on property that investors could expect.

It was good TV though, for too long VI's have had free run of the airwaves and print media (the IT being the worst offender). I think we can expect more of this over the next few months, it could be even more interesting than the general election.
 

I agree...it is pretty annoying to see auctioneers and other such "professionals" making outrageous claims without being forced to back them up. Remember that Sherry Fitzgerald advert with the baby saying property has gone up by 100% in the last decade...and at that rate an apartment will cost €2 million by the time he's an adult!
Jim Power did reel off statistics to back up his viewpoint...nothing vague, nothing wooly.
Was there anything on Joe Duffy today about the programme? I heard George Hook and Matt Cooper...not bad.
 
People don't seem to be interested in assessing the evidence and arriving at a result.
Click to expand...

I don't believe it is possible to do that. There are far too many factors to analyse, many of which would be subjective or at best qualitative.
 
beattie said:
I wouldn't totally believe Jim Powers assertion that he isn't a cheerleader for the property boom. Friends First will indirectly make money from clients who have done well from it.
Click to expand...
Surely they have as much if not more of a vested interest in getting people out of property and into equities? This accusation is pretty facile in my opinion.
 
ClubMan said:
Surely they have as much if not more of a vested interest in getting people out of property and into equities? This accusation is pretty facile in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so sure, I don't think people are likely to invest in anything when they're very worried or struggling with their primary investment in their home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register