Back
  Living and working in Dublin
    
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3



Joined:
Jun 2005
Posts:
3557
Location:
dublin
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:42 pm 

Oskorei wrote:
Its hard to see any sort of reasonable solution in the short term tho. Most of these properties will have mortgages outstanding so the landlord will need that figure plus a percentage ontop for maintanance and most will add a couple of percent for a profit margin. This formulae coupled with the increase in demnd is a perfect storm.


Immediately put in legislation that either heavily taxes or caps the amount that can be made from apartments being used as short let holiday homes. So many apartments that where not built for that purpose are being used as holiday homes in key locations all around the city.

Places like Staycity and The Key Collection are buying up apartments and leaving them empty for weeks at a time throughout the year only to use them as an AirBNB style replacement for hotels.


Top
 Profile   
 


User avatar

Joined:
Oct 2007
Posts:
483
Location:
Dublin
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:18 pm 

Honestly I don't think more regulation there is really the answer. AirBnB do a pretty important job of providing temporary accommodation for legions of foreign workers who come in to do the tech jobs that are buoying the economy. The fact that this becomes semi-permanent for them is the real symptom.

IMO the government should do what it did in the 30's-50's; plan and build decent housing around real communities, releasing land for others to do likewise. Lots of it. Every segment of the market has a supply problem, from social to detached suburban, but if you start by building good housing, affordable for middle-income people, it'll vent the problem for all levels.


Top
 Profile   
 



Joined:
Jun 2005
Posts:
3557
Location:
dublin
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:27 pm 

Midhir wrote:
Honestly I don't think more regulation there is really the answer. AirBnB do a pretty important job of providing temporary accommodation for legions of foreign workers who come in to do the tech jobs that are buoying the economy. The fact that this becomes semi-permanent for them is the real symptom.

IMO the government should do what it did in the 30's-50's; plan and build decent housing around real communities, releasing land for others to do likewise. Lots of it. Every segment of the market has a supply problem, from social to detached suburban, but if you start by building good housing, affordable for middle-income people, it'll vent the problem for all levels.


Foreign workers that could just stay here full time if you know, the housing crisis wasn't swelled up by there being more apartments available right now in Dublin on short term stays than those available for people who need somewhere to live.

What foreign workers are staying here on such short term lets that are buoying the economy? If you're staying in a country for a month to work, how much are you actually helping the economy along as oppose to if you just lived here full time.

It's funny that you mention them too, because I remember an article from a year or so ago in which a HR manager from Paypal was saying it was costing them an incredible amount of money to house workers in hotels and Airbnb style apartments while they look for long term homes. That the lack of available long term homes was making Dublin less and less attractive as a destination for people.

The company I work for is having an incredibly difficult time getting foreigners to work here because they all take one look at Daft.ie and see how much it costs to get anywhere, from the city centre all the way out to Blanchardstown (where the building is located) and figure out that they'll be financially worse off here than if they stayed in their own country earning less.

I live in an apartment block that was purpose built for people to live in. The landlords are locked in a fight against a company called The Key Collection - because they've been buying up apartments in the building to rent out to hen/stag parties and German and American tourists. They own over 25% of the apartments in the building. On my floor alone, 2 of the 5 apartments are owned by that company and are rented out a day at a time.

The obvious answer is build. Build up and build. But building isn't going to put 300+ apartments onto the market within a year.


Top
 Profile   
 


User avatar

Joined:
Oct 2007
Posts:
483
Location:
Dublin
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:40 pm 

They need short-term lets when they first come here while they look for permanent accommodation. That can take months in the market as it is. And while I don't know the exact figures I'd say there's solid growth in this segment.

In other words, people aren't moving out into permanent housing quick enough to free up spaces for those coming in.

Dublin's becoming less attractive because of the housing issue, that's true for sure. But it hasn't even nearly made a dent yet. The tech jobs are just too attractive if you're prepared to ride this out.

As for building, well the government is fast-tracking things like Clay Farms, which will put up nearly 1000 apartments and homes within a year. It is doable. But if we're to make up the deficit we need to be doing 20x that per year.


Top
 Profile   
 



Joined:
Jun 2005
Posts:
3557
Location:
dublin
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:56 pm 

Midhir wrote:
In other words, people aren't moving out into permanent housing quick enough to free up spaces for those coming in.


Because more and more permanent homes are being bought up to be used as temporary accommodation at the cost of employers and to make a months rent in a weekend from tourists.

Here is a link to the article from the Paypal boss. They went and asked current employees to let new employees live with them. Airbnb isn't a solution or a symptom, it's a problem itself.

I'm not saying every Airbnb need's to go, but they shouldn't be allowed to operate all year long and only be occupied maybe 50% of that time. And companies like TKC - who own a chain of hotels - shouldn't be able to buy up homes to use as a commercial entity.

You remove that and you free up both a) apartments that aren't occupied 100% of the time and b) properties for people to actually buy. It increases the supply, which should lower market values on both renting and purchasing.

*EDIT*

Just on Clay Farms - the article I could find on it from this year mentions this - which is something else that needs to stop. Affordable homes need to be whats built, not stuff that only the wealthy and companies can afford to later rent out at €800 per room.

"Construction has already started, and the first 50 houses are due to go on sale from September with prices for the three-beds starting at €470,000 and four-beds from €560,000."

We don't need 3 and 4 bedroom houses at half a million being built. Regular people can't afford those. Banks will laugh you out of the building looking for a mortgage on that.


Top
 Profile   
 


User avatar

Joined:
Sep 2011
Posts:
4588
Location:
footloose onstead heinous vermifugal newssheet
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:07 pm 

Midhir wrote:
They need short-term lets when they first come here while they look for permanent accommodation. That can take months in the market as it is. And while I don't know the exact figures I'd say there's solid growth in this segment.

In other words, people aren't moving out into permanent housing quick enough to free up spaces for those coming in.

Dublin's becoming less attractive because of the housing issue, that's true for sure. But it hasn't even nearly made a dent yet.


This is a double-edged sword situation and you've decided to run with just one side of it. If all of the accommodation in Dublin that is either empty, or empty for a large part of the year, or being used exclusively as a cash cow, if all of that was freed up for permanent residency this would constitute much more housing for those foreign job seekers to move into without having to wait around months in temporary accommodation, paying through the nose to people who are helping to exacerbate the situation they're trying to get out of; i.e. more housing than could be provided in greater Dublin by new building projects in the immediate future. Why rezone more and more and more land before doing something about the unoccupied, already constructed spaces that are there?


Top
 Profile   
 


User avatar

Joined:
Oct 2007
Posts:
483
Location:
Dublin
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:28 pm 

Quote:
I'm not saying every Airbnb need's to go, but they shouldn't be allowed to operate all year long and only be occupied maybe 50% of that time.


AirBNB lets in Dublin are reaching north of 90% occupancy. Which is indicative of the real problem - supply.

I agree on the Clayfarm comment about them being too expensive. It's not somewhere I'd want to live either. But prices of corporation houses in Crumlin and Inchicore are reaching €300k+ because people who would be buying new-builds are creating upward pressure there instead.

Quote:
if all of that was freed up for permanent residency this would constitute much more housing for those foreign job seekers to move into without having to wait around months in temporary accommodation


FWIW I haven't chosen a side of the argument just looked at the evidence as it is. This just sounds like pushing food around the plate. Wasn't so long ago the gov't banned bedsits, and AirBNB has flourished in their place. Now you want to regulate AirBNB. But short-term letting is profitable for a reason, there's a supply shortage so people will pay more. Remove or regulate AirBNB, just don't expect something else to replace it.

Quote:
Why rezone more and more and more land before doing something about the unoccupied, already constructed spaces that are there?


Because Dublin is growing, has been so through nearly a decade of little or no building, and supply is badly behind demand.


Top
 Profile   
 



Joined:
Jun 2005
Posts:
3557
Location:
dublin
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:41 pm 

Airbnb are not the only company doing this. Someone asked for a reasonable short term solution and a short term solution until we can build 50 houses is to stop letting people/companies rent out full apartments on a short term basis throughout the year while they might maintain under 50% occupancy throughout the year.

If someone wants to use Airbnb for it's original and intended purpose of subletting an extra room in a home that someone lives in, or subletting your apartment while you're away in another country, then by all means continue to do that. It's a valuable service.

According to this site - from what I can gather, Airbnb does not have 90% occupancy. There are 3000 listings for full apartments/houses and they reach an estimated occupancy of under 30%. Click on the recent filter and that drops to 1380 listings that reach 50% occupancy.

Are you honestly suggesting that it's better to have 1380 at 50% occupancy throughout the year than to have those as full time residencies? They're already built as Chris pointed out, but by that available data they're barely being used.


Top
 Profile   
 


User avatar

Joined:
Oct 2007
Posts:
483
Location:
Dublin
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:04 pm 

Quote:
If someone wants to use Airbnb for it's original and intended purpose of subletting an extra room in a home that someone lives in, or subletting your apartment while you're away in another country, then by all means continue to do that. It's a valuable service.


They own the property, what are you going to do? Ban AirBNB and force them to rent it out traditionally?

Lookit, the government is out in Croatia trying to entice young, well-educated workers to come work for Facebook, Google, Amazon etc in Ireland. Right now they're in London trying to get international banks to relocate to Dublin after Brexit. They're highly successful at this. Yet they're, as yet, not doing much to provide accommodation for the people that come.

It's market forces, and the market is moving to fill a need the government is neglecting.

As for that site, I'd take those numbers with a pinch of salt. Calculating occupancy based on reviews is watery as hell. You have about two weeks after your trip to leave a review on AirBNB. I stayed in 6 AirBNBs last year, reviewed maybe 2.


Top
 Profile   
 


User avatar

Joined:
Sep 2011
Posts:
4588
Location:
footloose onstead heinous vermifugal newssheet
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:43 pm 

Midhir wrote:
Quote:
If someone wants to use Airbnb for it's original and intended purpose of subletting an extra room in a home that someone lives in, or subletting your apartment while you're away in another country, then by all means continue to do that. It's a valuable service.


They own the property, what are you going to do? Ban AirBNB and force them to rent it out traditionally?


Quote:
Since the start of this year, Airbnb's systems automatically limit entire home listings in Greater London to 90 nights per calendar year. This is because short-term lets are subject to planning restrictions in the capital, although there may be exceptions if hosts are granted permission from their local authority. In Amsterdam, the limit is 60 nights.


That could be done, for example. New York and Berlin have flat out banned AirBnB, Barcelona are cracking down on them, and many other cities will follow.


Top
 Profile   
 


User avatar

Joined:
May 2007
Posts:
8385
Location:
Heaven
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 7:59 pm 

Just because you own a property doesn't mean you can do anything you like with it. You can't use it as a knocking shop or a shebeen, you can't build an extension without planning permission etc.

Surely a step in the right direction would be to subject AirBnB hosts to all the same tax, insurance, licencing etc requirements as hotels and B&Bs would be a start.

I also think the argument about foreign workers is a red herring. Foreign workers, like all workers, would be better served by a property market with enough supply, affordable rent, protection for tenants and affordable house prices. When they initially move here they would then just need a fortnight in a hostel or B&B (or hotel if on a good wage) to find somewhere to live. Such markets exist in numerous cities worldwide.


Top
 Profile   
 



Joined:
Jun 2005
Posts:
3557
Location:
dublin
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:02 pm 

Yep. NYC has long had bans against short term lets because of supply issues and other problems caused by short term lets, and several European cities are bringing in laws and regulations because they identified problems that short term lets are creating.

More accommodation is obviously needed. But we can't have more in the next few weeks. We could have whats already in place, but kept unavailable.


Top
 Profile   
 


User avatar

Joined:
Oct 2007
Posts:
483
Location:
Dublin
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:23 pm 

Quote:
Just because you own a property doesn't mean you can do anything you like with it. You can't use it as a knocking shop or a shebeen, you can't build an extension without planning permission etc.


Right, but you can't be forced to rent it out or take on a lodger. I think my point is getting lost here. It's simply that I believe the animosity towards AirBNB is misplaced, that any benefit from a clampdown would be short lived and that, actually, they probably provide a useful service given the circumstances.

Even according to that website there are only 3000 entire homes available on AirBNB, though any links I clicked were dead. Even if every single host decided long-term rental was appropriate for them and 3000 properties hit the market immediately it would hardly make a dent. McWilliams puts the shortfall at 50,000 homes. Coveney's plan was to bring 200,000 existing, empty homes onto the market with CGT breaks.

Quote:
Surely a step in the right direction would be to subject AirBnB hosts to all the same tax, insurance, licencing etc requirements as hotels and B&Bs would be a start.


Fine with this.

Quote:
I also think the argument about foreign workers is a red herring. Foreign workers, like all workers, would be better served by a property market with enough supply, affordable rent, protection for tenants and affordable house prices. When they initially move here they would then just need a fortnight in a hostel or B&B (or hotel if on a good wage) to find somewhere to live. Such markets exist in numerous cities worldwide.


This is basically my point, bar the first sentence. Just that having enough supply encourages the other three.

Dublin just isn't comparable to NYC. It has ample growing room for a start.


Top
 Profile   
 


User avatar

Joined:
Jan 2008
Posts:
250
Location:
Human All Too Human
PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2017 1:13 am 

Nah fuck AirBnB, it's to the detriment of society overall so no way should it be allowed 100%. In Berlin it's 50% of the property that can be short term let. Airbnb types have no concern for impact on neighbours, planning law, or the wider community.

6,700+ listings in Dublin on Airbnb. Half of which are ENTIRE apartments/houses. Fuck that. We've got investors from outside Ireland nabbing apartments for the sole reason for putting them up on the airbnb due to the high return.

The government ban uber but yet see nothing wrong with Airbnb.. :roll:

The population of the country grew by 434,000 between 2006 and 2016. New supply is painfully slow to come on the market. I actually agree with the lending rules as it has been limiting increases somewhat. With regards renting, what an utter clusterfuck. We need to build up.


Top
 Profile   
 



Joined:
Jun 2005
Posts:
819
Location:
Cork
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 3:06 am 

TemplarOfSteel wrote:
I have a Skype interview on Tuesday morning for a position in Dublin. It's 80% of a full time position


So it was a part time job then?? It's surely either a full time job or it's not!!


Top
 Profile   
 

Page: Previous  1, 2, 3