Any collaborative effort to control rents can control a market irrespective of the size of the group doing so. Without getting to deep into economics institutional landlords are effecting the market simply by showing what rents are demanded in a market that has chronic undersupply. When there is equilibrium in a market then it is more difficult for markets to be controlled by either "buyers" or "sellers" unless either controls a significant part of the market.By setting your rents below market in order to attract the most desirable tenants, you were very consciously competing against other landlords, including institutional landlords. Not competing to get the highest immediate rent, but to get the most desirable tenant. I hope the strategy worked for you and, if it did, it worked precisely because the rent you sought was competitive.
I can't speak for Dr Strangelove as regards what he meant by "amateur landlord", but I think his post contrasts institutional landlords on the one hand (renting property is their primary or only business; they have a relatively large number of properties to let) and small, private landlords on the other (they have other occupations and other sources of income; they have a small number of properties, often just one, to let). His point is that, in numerical terms, the market is dominated by the small, private landlords. Although the institutional investors are much, much bigger than almost any private landlord, they only let about 4% of properties for rent, and that situation is a long, long way from a situation in which institutional investors would have the market power to determine market rent levels.
More or less the above.I can't speak for Dr Strangelove as regards what he meant by "amateur landlord", but I think his post contrasts institutional landlords on the one hand (renting property is their primary or only business; they have a relatively large number of properties to let) and small, private landlords on the other (they have other occupations and other sources of income; they have a small number of properties, often just one, to let). His point is that, in numerical terms, the market is dominated by the small, private landlords.
Where I am/was but will be, originally there never were institutional. But there are now and will be. When I started it was white Irish, but quickly became Polish/Lithuanians - hard workers. Changed before I got out to other emigrants including refugee or asylum, hard to tell. A couple clearly traumatised, war or mental issues. No baddies. But my lord are they all milking the system. My child now subletting off a HAP tenant of a sibling, said tenant living where with wife and kids. Just got his naturalisation papers. He saw the property being renovated and told us he’s a load of potential tenants. The Irish roofer also wants to rent it, for his adult at home mid twenties child.By setting your rents below market in order to attract the most desirable tenants, you were very consciously competing against other landlords, including institutional landlords. Not competing to get the highest immediate rent, but to get the most desirable tenant. I hope the strategy worked for you and, if it did, it worked precisely because the rent you sought was competitive.
The problem is finding finance, and agreeing on what is required. Unlike most European countries where up to half the population live in apartments just 10% do so here. And of the remaining housing stock, only 10% is 2 bed homes or smaller.Perhaps because there are so few who are prepared to actually put in any effort at all? The countless threads of issues with management companies here would suggest many don't want to put in the effort and are happier complaining about the efforts of the few who do.
No problem being called amateur, a name doesnt mean much..More or less the above.
ASM threads are full of landlords with:
-1 or 2 properties assembled by accidental
-profound ignorance of the regulatory regime they have to operate in
So I think “amateur” is fair terminology.
Likewise just browse daft.ie and you’ll find lots of lettings by people who clearly don't take much care of their asset.
I dont see this..I can't speak for Dr Strangelove as regards what he meant by "amateur landlord", but I think his post contrasts institutional landlords on the one hand (renting property is their primary or only business; they have a relatively large number of properties to let) and small, private landlords on the other (they have other occupations and other sources of income; they have a small number of properties, often just one, to let). His point is that, in numerical terms, the market is dominated by the small, private landlords.
Here’s one.Care to show what you mean, providing 1 or 2 examples wont do, as you said "lots of lettings"?
I dont see it...Here’s one.
No letting agent, pure minimum upkeep of property visible in photos.
I am not dissing this. The landlord is providing a useful service.
This would be an attractive property for lots of people, the rent is low and it is city centre (I know it is a studio). The fact that the rent is €878 indicates that the landlord is complying with the RPZ rules and that may be why upkeep is limited. Current allowed increases are €0 or as close to it as makes no difference.Here’s one.
No letting agent, pure minimum upkeep of property visible in photos.
I am not dissing this. The landlord is providing a useful service.
The property I rent is well maintained. But that's definitely a thing that LLs would consider. When I purchased the property, we renovated it from top to bottom. Our goal was to rent a nice place at the highest price possible. Now, it's about 60 per cent under the market. It's maintained but things that we could have done are simply not done. Why would we change a decent kitchen with a rent stuck in the past? We could rent it multiple times each time it comes to the market.The landlord could improve the studio, but why bother. It'll rent at that price and the rent can't be increased even if it has a very expensive makeover. The landlord is likely simply making a business decision here as we are always being encouraged to do on this forum.
Why would you any way? It's a business!! Any further investment of funds should be to protect the value of your asset or increase your return. In a renters' market investing in a new kitchen might makes sense in order to attract or retain better tenants, but it makes zero sense in the current market.Why would we change a decent kitchen with a rent stuck in the past?
I'm reminded of Swedish economist Assar Lindbeck who once said “In many cases rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city—except for bombing.”Why would you any way? It's a business!! Any further investment of funds should be to protect the value of your asset or increase your return. In a renters' market investing in a new kitchen might makes sense in order to attract or retain better tenants, but it makes zero sense in the current market.
Rent controls are known to negatively impact supply, but that's a different matter. Thinking about spending money unnecessarily replacing fixtures and fittings is nothing to do with rent controls, it's just poor business.I'm reminded of Swedish economist Assar Lindbeck who once said “In many cases rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city—except for bombing.”
The property I rent is well maintained. But that's definitely a thing that LLs would consider. When I purchased the property, we renovated it from top to bottom. Our goal was to rent a nice place at the highest price possible. Now, it's about 60 per cent under the market. It's maintained but things that we could have done are simply not done. Why would we change a decent kitchen with a rent stuck in the past? We could rent it multiple times each time it comes to the market.
Not necessarily. Absent rent controls, you could well take a business decision to refurbish on the basis that you will get a higher rent and/or a better tenant ie. the investment ultimately pays for itself and then makes you a profit.Rent controls are known to negatively impact supply, but that's a different matter. Thinking about spending money unnecessarily replacing fixtures and fittings is nothing to do with rent controls, it's just poor business.
Yes, but as stated above, in the current market you are unlikely to get a return on that investment. In a market where rents are at an all time high, spending thousands on a slightly better kitchen is not likely to be a wise investment.Not necessarily. Absent rent controls, you could well take a business decision to refurbish on the basis that you will get a higher rent and/or a better tenant ie. the investment ultimately pays for itself and then makes you a profit.
Why would you change the kitchen anyway, if its in good condition and the tenant isn't complaining? My parents are perfectly happy with an early 1980s kitchen in good working order and looks much nicer than the stern metallic and grey look so trendy now. If it isn't broken, why fix it?The property I rent is well maintained. But that's definitely a thing that LLs would consider. When I purchased the property, we renovated it from top to bottom. Our goal was to rent a nice place at the highest price possible. Now, it's about 60 per cent under the market. It's maintained but things that we could have done are simply not done. Why would we change a decent kitchen with a rent stuck in the past? We could rent it multiple times each time it comes to the market.
To be fair there, as of 2007 or so I was paying around 650 per calendar month for something like that in Cork city north. But my income was half what it is now with poorer t+cs. It comes as no surprise that rents have risen in line with salaries - people keep going on about the tiger era rents being lower, but an awful lot of the people renting then were earning half or less what many tenants earn now. And a lot of those tenants were far less likely to buy in those times either, there was a much bigger gap for the typical tiger era tenant who couldn't afford to buy compared to tenants in Dublin now earning 60-80k who have a far better change of affording something north county or commuter belt than the same age group of 20 years ago.I dont see it...
The rent aint as exorbitant, other stuff in the city go from 2k up to 3k+
Its clean, when you say minimum upkeep, just the stuff is old
I do not see a problem with that, I would say would suit alot of people who wont / cant pay the other prices
In fairness, you pay 1450pm, and may spend 500 - 1k on doing it up yourself - lick of paint, IKEA stuff if you want.
Or pay 2k (at a very minimum) to company.
18,400 v 24k (at a minimum) - I know what Id go for.
Ppl are so easily fooled, blinded by bling!
Now if you could show alot of damp ridden, dirt everywhere etc then you would prove your point!
Any landlord who has rents locked in by RPZ won't advertise on daft.ie. They cannot. Someone told me a couple of years ago that her daughter put a rental up on daft and she got 60 calls in one day, most of them wanting to know if she accepted HAP. Most side-line landlords (aka most landlords) won't have the time to deal with that so they'll put out via word of mouth via friends, family or work that there's a good value tenancy available, and it will be filled in no time. You also don't want to be advertising on DAFT if you were not previously registered and are moving the rent higher than the permitted rpz limit to the new tenant.I dont see this..
On daft their are 2017 properties to rent in ireland, out of that county dublin has 1081 properties which is over half (as far as I can tell county dublin does not even account for the whole of Dublin either).
To me it looks like alot of those 1081 properties are from companies, I didnt go through the 55 pages but looks like mostly companies renting them out?
Care to show how the market is dominated by small landlords?
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?