F
foghorn
Guest
Wouldn't you agree that on the housing bubble, he's been more right than you so far?
Morgan Kelly on Bank Robbers
- Thread starter Carramore
- Start date
Wouldn't you agree that on the housing bubble, he's been more right than you so far?
Raskolnikov
Registered User
- Messages
- 351
There is an oversupply of property in some counties that may never be filled. Leitrim, for example, has 30% of the housing stock lying empty ([broken link removed]).
Who is going to live in all these empty houses? Is it really so unrealistic to think that we could see some housing stock demolished?
Z
z109
Guest
Look at all the houses in the countryside that are demolished every year as the site is more valuable than the house on it. Will it get to the stage that the agricultural land under rural housing estates is worth knocking the houses to access? I hope not. Will it get to the stage that the unsold houses are outdated (in insulation and heating terms) and that it would be cheaper to knock than retro-fit them? I don't see why not.
Unless there is a mass exodus to live in and estate rural Ireland, who is going to live in these houses?
Don't believe there are ghost estates? Have look here:
http://ghostestates.com/main.php?g2_view=map.ShowMap
Unless there is a mass exodus to live in and estate rural Ireland, who is going to live in these houses?
Don't believe there are ghost estates? Have look here:
http://ghostestates.com/main.php?g2_view=map.ShowMap
C
charliemacck
Guest
Morgan Kelly predicted that Irish banks would require nationalisation back in March, something that Jim Power said was "ridiculous". So, yet another Kelly has been proven right about.
canicemcavoy
Registered User
- Messages
- 601
If only it was 1.5billion as Brendan suggested:
canicemcavoy
Registered User
- Messages
- 601
T
Tyrone Laces
Guest
I visited a few of these ghost estates recently around Cork - scary places - like something from "Sean of the Dead".
perhaps OT - why are most of the posters on this thread "banned"? Did they upset someone? Morgan Kelly has been right, right and right again - simples!
perhaps OT - why are most of the posters on this thread "banned"? Did they upset someone? Morgan Kelly has been right, right and right again - simples!
S
sunrock
Guest
This idea of demolishing ghost estates ,I am totally against.
It seems to have more to do with reducing the housing stock and increasing the price of the remaining houses than anything else.
Take a ghost estate beside some village in rural ireland.Lets presume that the government throiugh NAMA is now the owner of this ghost estate.
Agricultural land is now worth less than 10,000euros an acre so even if a house took up a single acre ,after demolition the agricultural value is less than 10k.
I am sure these houses could be sold as holiday homes for more money and it would be a great benefit/amenity to the family purchasing and also to the local community.
Of course there would have to be strict rules like only one holiday home per family already working/living in the country etc.The price would have to be very reasonable...definetly less than 50k.
Also the people on housing lists should be accomadated as well as encouragement for our poorer emigrants who were "persuaded" to leave in earlier generations to avail of cheap housing.
However I am not hopeful as it seems the only thing on the minds of the gov/bankers/developers is how to get house prices high again.They are muddling thru`at the moment in a "suspended animation trance" until the world economy or something happens to lift all boats and increase house prices again.
My advise to them is not to wait for that solution but to effect an orderly disposal of the housing units that come into the governments hands.
It seems to have more to do with reducing the housing stock and increasing the price of the remaining houses than anything else.
Take a ghost estate beside some village in rural ireland.Lets presume that the government throiugh NAMA is now the owner of this ghost estate.
Agricultural land is now worth less than 10,000euros an acre so even if a house took up a single acre ,after demolition the agricultural value is less than 10k.
I am sure these houses could be sold as holiday homes for more money and it would be a great benefit/amenity to the family purchasing and also to the local community.
Of course there would have to be strict rules like only one holiday home per family already working/living in the country etc.The price would have to be very reasonable...definetly less than 50k.
Also the people on housing lists should be accomadated as well as encouragement for our poorer emigrants who were "persuaded" to leave in earlier generations to avail of cheap housing.
However I am not hopeful as it seems the only thing on the minds of the gov/bankers/developers is how to get house prices high again.They are muddling thru`at the moment in a "suspended animation trance" until the world economy or something happens to lift all boats and increase house prices again.
My advise to them is not to wait for that solution but to effect an orderly disposal of the housing units that come into the governments hands.
Have you seen where some of these estates are? Nobody wants to "holiday" in a concrete jungle 10 miles outside Cavan town. The abandoned ghost estates will quickly become derelict and a magnet for anti-social behaviour as well as eyesores.
We got here thanks to market interference. The solution is not more market manipulation & price fixing.
Move people with no jobs and low prospects to areas where they have zero prospects?
Encouraging people to emigrate? Are you Brian Lenihan Snr?
From Joe Brennan in todays Indo : http://www.independent.ie/business/...osses-expected-to-reach-836414bn-2102830.html
S
sunrock
Guest
Many of these "ghost estates" are located near scenic rural towns and villages etc and imo would appeal to people living in build up areas in cities and big towns.
Far from my suggestion of selling them for less than 50k being market interference,I think it is all these houses are worth in a real supply and demand situation. Of course there has to be rules , otherwise one person could buy up 100 houses.
As i said these houses in the ghost estates in rural ireland could be irish holiday homes for families living in dublin for example.They are not going to work in leitrim.
And whats wrong with offering one of these houses to a returning emigrant who now want to live out their days in Ireland?
The estates I am referring to are nice low density estates that are located in scenic rural areas..not concrete jungle type high density developement.
Maybe it was a mistake to build these estates, but the fact is these houses have now been build and imo are worth more than the agricultural value of the land there are build on.These houses should be used for the benefit of the irish people who are paying tax to fund NAMA etc
The choice is not between bulldosing them or else charging exorbitant prices for them or even hanging onto them until things pick up in 10 years or whenever.
Many irish people have holiday homes in the west of ireland that lie empty for most of the year and there is no problem with antisocial behaviour etc as crime is low and anti social behavior is very low.
I agree with Sunrock.
These houses have been constructed now. It does not make sense to knock them down, environmentally or in any other way. They will be sold if they are priced correctly. Lots of people would be willing to purchase houses in Leitrim or Longford as holiday homes if the price was right, the landscape may not be as dramatic as the west coast but it is nevertheless attractive. The hippy scene up in Leitrim of artists, playwrights etc started off in the 80s because house prices were very low compared to the rest of the country.
The are only a small number of cases where it would make sense to demolish, such as partically completed units that have been exposed to the elements over a significant period of time and are deteriorating.
As for the small size of the units, people don't seem to realise that housing isn't just for families. If the costs of property transactions became more reasonable we would have a lot more trading up and down, from flats to houses to flats. There may be a deficit of large family homes with decent gardens, but knocking down smaller units will not solve this.
These houses have been constructed now. It does not make sense to knock them down, environmentally or in any other way. They will be sold if they are priced correctly. Lots of people would be willing to purchase houses in Leitrim or Longford as holiday homes if the price was right, the landscape may not be as dramatic as the west coast but it is nevertheless attractive. The hippy scene up in Leitrim of artists, playwrights etc started off in the 80s because house prices were very low compared to the rest of the country.
The are only a small number of cases where it would make sense to demolish, such as partically completed units that have been exposed to the elements over a significant period of time and are deteriorating.
As for the small size of the units, people don't seem to realise that housing isn't just for families. If the costs of property transactions became more reasonable we would have a lot more trading up and down, from flats to houses to flats. There may be a deficit of large family homes with decent gardens, but knocking down smaller units will not solve this.
Silence from Brendan is deafening. I suppouse he did have his TV appearance tonight to worry about.
Apology to Morgan Kelly due I feel. If some of the numpties in this Country started taking what he and the likes of David McWilliams say seriously then we might be able to begin putting some semblance of reality back into all our lives
Apology to Morgan Kelly due I feel. If some of the numpties in this Country started taking what he and the likes of David McWilliams say seriously then we might be able to begin putting some semblance of reality back into all our lives
I don't know what planet some of you are on. If I was given a free house in Leitrim, Cavan etc I wouldn't want it, if I could buy 100 of them for 5 Euro each I wouldn't want them, who would want them, that's the point. You can't rent them, you don't want to holiday there, they are worthless so they may as well go back to agricultural land. We are talking about houses in the middle of nowhere with no amenities, no reason to go to, no rental market, half finished unsightly estates.
Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 54,058
The issue of buring €1.5 billion has been discussed at length earlier in this thread. My main point was that such comments damage the credibility of the person making the comments.
"IRELAND WILL see more demolition than construction of houses over the next decade..." The full article is no longer available online.
The discussion on Askaboutmoney after the above article was interesting.
Bronte:
Bronte, Yog and Raskolnikov make very valid points in moderate language. I will pay much more attention to them than to someone who appears to be sensationalist just for the sake of it.
Morgan Kelly may well be right that we will demolish more houses than we will build over the next decade. We won't know for ten years.
There are ghost estates which will have to be demolished or abandoned.
Will there be more houses demolished than built? I don't know the answer to that. I have been through different booms and busts. When things are very gloomy, we feel that we will never recover.
I am sure that we will recover. I have no idea how long it will take. 2 years? 5 years? 20 years? I do think that there is some risk this time, that the state could become insolvent, if the government does not keep its resolve to cut public expenditure.
In this thread, I have dealt with the issue of guys like Kelly and McWilliams having interesting things to say but losing credibility because of the language they use. And as I said in that thread, I am trying to overcome my reluctance to listen to them.
"IRELAND WILL see more demolition than construction of houses over the next decade..." The full article is no longer available online.
The discussion on Askaboutmoney after the above article was interesting.
Bronte:
Yoganmayhew
Raskolnikov made the same point.
Bronte, Yog and Raskolnikov make very valid points in moderate language. I will pay much more attention to them than to someone who appears to be sensationalist just for the sake of it.
Morgan Kelly may well be right that we will demolish more houses than we will build over the next decade. We won't know for ten years.
There are ghost estates which will have to be demolished or abandoned.
Will there be more houses demolished than built? I don't know the answer to that. I have been through different booms and busts. When things are very gloomy, we feel that we will never recover.
I am sure that we will recover. I have no idea how long it will take. 2 years? 5 years? 20 years? I do think that there is some risk this time, that the state could become insolvent, if the government does not keep its resolve to cut public expenditure.
In this thread, I have dealt with the issue of guys like Kelly and McWilliams having interesting things to say but losing credibility because of the language they use. And as I said in that thread, I am trying to overcome my reluctance to listen to them.
I don't get this point. What difference does the language make if the point is correct?
S
sunrock
Guest
They are not worthless and they are worth more than the land they are built on . To say othwise is just silly talk.These houses are no doubt going into Nama at 200k each or whatever. Essentially these houses are now owned by the taxpayer as the government will own them.
I say let families in dublin etc buy them for a discount..maybe 30k or 20 k or even5k . The agricultural land the houses were built on will be worth less plus the cost of demolition etc.
Of course the developers would love to demolish all the unsold houses , create a shortage and have another building boom, but thats no good for the taxpayer.
canicemcavoy
Registered User
- Messages
- 601
I must admit I don't understand why Brendan often makes this point either. Many many bulls talked ridiculous nonsense that was both off the top and factually incorrect, yet this is never used as a reason not to be bullish on property.
Bearish commentators were in the position of a person sitting in a room filled with smoke attempting to warn of a fire, while 19 other people comment that everything is fine. If they used strong language, there was good reason for it.
R