Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 54,773
Funds are certainly going to be a big part of funding of new development (in particular apartments). The days of new multi-unit developments having multiple owners are largely gone. A friend of mine knows this space and he pointed out the bleeding obvious recently to me. These developments are FAR more valuable (in the region of 20%) when owned as a whole than when owned separately. There are obvious economies of scale from managing an entire development, but the big plus is that you can sell up or re-develop the site in 20 or 25 years. This is impossible with developments in multiple ownership. Multiple ownershp will still exist at the very high end, but the vast majority of new build apartments will have a single owner.I understand that many properties in places like Vienna (where I lived) were owned by pension funds and the like. This seems a more stable prospect, but probably needs to be considered in the round as part of a long-term housing strategy.
horusd if any of the information I have posted below is incorrect please post and correct it,@ClubMan lol. I know, and given our history, "forrin" absentee landlords might be anathema, but I suspect there are economies of scale in larger owners such as pension funds having an input. I imagine we could, to some extent, copy and paste legal and tax legislation (at least somewhat) from our European friends to make it a runner. This would necessarily form part of a comprehensive response to problems in the housing market.
Not disagreeing with your main point but just noting there can be a flip side to that story down the line though which is if a single owner wants to redevelop in 20 years they have an incentive to let things run down at that point.Funds are certainly going to be a big part of funding of new development (in particular apartments). The days of new multi-unit developments having multiple owners are largely gone. A friend of mine knows this space and he pointed out the bleeding obvious recently to me. These developments are FAR more valuable (in the region of 20%) when owned as a whole than when owned separately. There are obvious economies of scale from managing an entire development, but the big plus is that you can sell up or re-develop the site in 20 or 25 years. This is impossible with developments in multiple ownership. Multiple ownershp will still exist at the very high end, but the vast majority of new build apartments will have a single owner.
The best landlord I ever had was a fund. They threatened the noisy neighbours upstairs with eviction and it worked. No issues or quibbles with notice or deposit. One neighbour said he'd lived in three or four units in the same development over the years. They rewarded loyal tenants with apartments with a better aspect. Sometimes people even moved within the development as their needs changed. None of this possible when developments are in multiple ownership.
When we did that, between the 30’s and 50’s, we spent very little on welfare, health and education. We were poor and, for the first 40 years after independence, got poorer. It was only when we shifted our state spending to human capital that we got richer. Going back to that model would be madness. We do need to build more public housing but we should be careful what we wish for.The solution would be to build 200k council houses and rent them to people, like we used to
Why if there is a lack of supply will there be a crash? Genuine question.They are selling because the market is topping. Another property crash is inevitable, as property is totally unaffordable for average earners.
If a three bedroom house/apartment in a modest area of Dublin costs 3/4k a month to rent, then it is beyond a family earning less than 70k. Most people don't earn 70k.
While the supply side is a massive problem, there remains a limit on what renters can pay and what buyers can borrow.
The solution would be to build 200k council houses and rent them to people, like we used to.
Irish people always voted with their feet,Why if there is a lack of supply will there be a crash? Genuine question.
As usual Purple has an interesting and original (afaik at least) point to contribute.When we did that, between the 30’s and 50’s, we spent very little on welfare, health and education. We were poor and, for the first 40 years after independence, got poorer. It was only when we shifted our state spending to human capital that we got richer. Going back to that model would be madness. We do need to build more public housing but we should be careful what we wish for.
In the past the UK, US and other countries were much richer than Ireland, so even low status jobs there could be attractive to Irish emigrants, today Ireland is wealthier than most other countries the emigration outlet is no longer very attractive.Irish people always voted with their feet,
They are selling because the market is topping. Another property crash is inevitable, as property is totally unaffordable for average earners.
If a three bedroom house/apartment in a modest area of Dublin costs 3/4k a month to rent, then it is beyond a family earning less than 70k. Most people don't earn 70k.
While the supply side is a massive problem, there remains a limit on what renters can pay and what buyers can borrow.
The solution would be to build 200k council houses and rent them to people, like we used to.
Ireland is full of high paid jobs at present, take away the high paid job for a year lots have no wealth worth talking about,In the past the UK, US and other countries were much richer than Ireland, so even low status jobs there could be attractive to Irish emigrants, today Ireland is wealthier than most other countries the emigration outlet is no longer very attractive.
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?