Ah shur tis great .. Developers ( Vulture funds ) & Receivers in line for state support

robut

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Messages
8,729
Taxpayer to fund developers - with no guarantees on prices

Major developers are in line to receive millions of euro in taxpayers' money to help offset the cost of building homes - but there are no guarantees they will be affordable.

The Government has committed to providing funding for global firms including Lone Star, Starwood Capital and Hines which jointly control assets worth billions of euro in Ireland and across the globe to help build roads and other infrastructure needed to open up land for housing.

Under the terms of the €225m so-called Local Infrastructure Housing Activation Fund (Lihaf), developers and local authorities were required to broker deals where it was agreed 40pc of all new homes would be sold at prices at least 10pc below market rates.

They could alternatively strike a deal to reduce the cost of each unit, in return for receiving taxpayers' money.

But the Irish Independent has learned no agreements have yet been reached, despite a July deadline passing. No money has been transferred to developers or councils.
Big players in the Irish market include Cairn Homes, which is named by councils as being involved in seven separate developments. Receivers acting on behalf of Nama are also in line for State support, as are developers including Gannon Homes, Castlethorn Construction, Ballymore and Cosgrave.

In all, more than 50 developers or agencies are involved.
Constantin Gurdgiev just published article on this:

8/8/17: Irish Taxpayers Face a New Nama Bill

Now, having demolished experienced developers and their professional teams, having dumped land and development sites into the hands of vulture investors, who have no expertise nor incentives to develop these sites, the State has unrolled a massive subsidy scheme to aid vultures in developing the sites they bought on the State-sponsored firesales.

As an aside, this June, Nama officially acknowledged the fact that majority of its sales of land resulted in no subsequent development. What Nama did not say is that the 'developers' hoarding land are the vulture funds that bought that land from Nama, just as Nama continued to insist that its operations are helping the construction and development markets.

Why? Because Nama was set up with an explicit mandate to 'help the economy recover' and to drive 'markets to restart functioning again', and to aid social housing crisis (remember when in 2012 - five years ago - Nama decided to 'get serious' about social housing?). And Nama has achieved its objectives so spectacularly, Ireland is now in the grips of a housing crisis, a rental market crisis and a cost-of-living crisis.
Irish taxpayers are now paying the third round of costs of the very same crisis: first round of payments went to Nama et al, second to the banks, and now to the 'developers' who were hand-picked by Nama and IBRC to do the job they failed to do, for which Nama was created in the first place.

Oh, and because you will ask me when the fourth round of payments by taxpayers will come due, why, it is already in works. That round of payments will cover emergency housing provision for people bankrupted by the banks and Nama-supported vultures. That too is on taxpayers shoulders, folks...
Wonderful .. you really couldnt make it up. Yet again here we are .. the taxpayer, the Irish citizen bending over and just taking it for country and for nation, how patriotic.

I just love the way Constantin closes the circle above ( in bold .. "Irish taxpayers are now paying the third round ..")

Any outrage .. no of course not .. article is chip paper already!
 
Last edited:


GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,846
Corporate welfare of billions at its finest. But sure let's focus on dolers with 8 kids and a few grand...

Sent from my SM-A320FL using Tapatalk
 

edwin

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2009
Messages
6,127
Taxpayer to fund developers - with no guarantees on prices





Constantin Gurdgiev just published article on this:

8/8/17: Irish Taxpayers Face a New Nama Bill





Wonderful .. you really couldnt make it up. Yet again here we are .. the taxpayer, the Irish citizen bending over and just taking it for country and for nation, how patriotic.

I just love the way Constantin closes the circle above ( in bold .. "Irish taxpayers are now paying the third round ..")

Any outrage .. no of course not .. article is chip paper already!
Both you and the sub-editor who wrote the headline are somewhat jumping the gun. Didn't you read the line from the article below?

"Not until deals are concluded can monies allocated under Lihaf, announced last March, be drawn down."
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,846
Both you and the sub-editor who wrote the headline are somewhat jumping the gun. Didn't you read the line from the article below?

"Not until deals are concluded can monies allocated under Lihaf, announced last March, be drawn down."
True. But do you think that it will actually result in affordable housing? And what actually is 'affordable'?

Sent from my SM-A320FL using Tapatalk
 

HenryHorace

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
2,983
Will we be seeing Leo standing on a street with a "Vulture funds cheat us all" sign?

Thought not....
 

HenryHorace

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
2,983
Corporate welfare of billions at its finest. But sure let's focus on dolers with 8 kids and a few grand...

Sent from my SM-A320FL using Tapatalk
It's the FG way. Absolute sub human scum all of the blueshirts.
 

robut

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Messages
8,729
Both you and the sub-editor who wrote the headline are somewhat jumping the gun. Didn't you read the line from the article below?

"Not until deals are concluded can monies allocated under Lihaf, announced last March, be drawn down."
Did you read constantins take ??? That makes more sense to me. See the OP. What is your view on that analysis?

Fair enough Edwin if you might not rate or like constantin,many here dont I imagine, but I tend to listen to what he might say. But thats just me.
 

edwin

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2009
Messages
6,127
True. But do you think that it will actually result in affordable housing? And what actually is 'affordable'?

Sent from my SM-A320FL using Tapatalk
The logic appears to be it will provide housing at below market rates. whether that's affordable or not depends on who you are I guess!
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,846
It's the FG way. Absolute sub human scum all of the blueshirts.
I don't have an issue with that as a political ideology, it's an option. The problem is when it gets mixed up with a special version of gombeenism and certain people, friends and families make out like bandits again and again. For example, siteserv...

Sent from my SM-A320FL using Tapatalk
 

edwin

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2009
Messages
6,127
Did you read constantins take ??? That makes more sense to me. See the OP. What is your view on that?

Fair enough Edwin if you might not rate or like constantin,many here dont I imagine, but I tend to listen to what he might say. But thats just me.
Constantin appears to have jumped the gun too. the article stated clearly that no government money would be given to developers without the quid pro quo of lower prices.

As for his views on Nama, I'd first like to know if he was one of the many people who confidently forecast Nama would lose billions. As we know, they all ended up with egg on their faces.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,846
Constantin appears to have jumped the gun too. the article stated clearly that no government money would be given to developers without the quid pro quo of lower prices.

As for his views on Nama, I'd first like to know if he was one of the many people who confidently forecast Nama would lose billions. As we know, they all ended up with egg on their faces.
And again let's see what is actually delivered in terms of affordable housing as opposed to the rhetoric. Nama did lose billions, the little discount of multiple billions gets lost over time for some bizarre reason. That's multiple billions on hook to the taxpayer.

Sent from my SM-A320FL using Tapatalk
 

edwin

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2009
Messages
6,127
And again let's see what is actually delivered in terms of affordable housing as opposed to the rhetoric. Nama did lose billions, the little discount of multiple billions gets lost over time for some bizarre reason. That's multiple billions on hook to the taxpayer.

Sent from my SM-A320FL using Tapatalk
No, the state lost out because Nama bought the loans at a discount - that's undeniable. We however then had all and sundry pontificate that Nama itself would lose further billions. That has not happened.
 

robut

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Messages
8,729
No, the state lost out because Nama bought the loans at a discount - that's undeniable. We however then had all and sundry pontificate that Nama itself would lose further billions. That has not happened.
So consequently .. regardless of NAMA .. WE the Irish Taxpayers, being the state, lost billions. Thats undeniable?

Who cares if Nama "lost" or not, thats semantics .. in the end we, the Irish Citizens have lost, thats what matters?
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,846
No, the state lost out because Nama bought the loans at a discount - that's undeniable. We however then had all and sundry pontificate that Nama itself would lose further billions. That has not happened.
Nama did better than forecast, correct. They also failed abysmally in fulfilling the 'social' remit of their billing, not that they give a toss about what that costs, cos it sure ain't them.

Sent from my SM-A320FL using Tapatalk
 

robut

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Messages
8,729
From the OP article:

An examination of application documents sent to the Department of Housing in October last year shows in many cases, developers refused to set out concrete proposals to ensure homes were delivered at affordable prices.
 
D

Deleted member 48908

True. But do you think that it will actually result in affordable housing? And what actually is 'affordable'?

Sent from my SM-A320FL using Tapatalk
Bang on. A price per sq ft needs to be established as a base to work from regarding affordability.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,846
Bang on. A price per sq ft needs to be established as a base to work from regarding affordability.
The gas thing is, they do not know what affordable actually is. They're waiting on a report from a bunch of lads who haven't even built a shed in their lives...

Sent from my SM-A320FL using Tapatalk
 
D

Deleted member 48908

The gas thing is, they do not know what affordable actually is. They're waiting on a report from a bunch of lads who haven't even built a shed in their lives...

Sent from my SM-A320FL using Tapatalk
Cost, plus 15% is a fair a normal profit.

Trouble is, what is cost these days?
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top