Ahern-link firm aims to build 'white elephant' retail outlet

Looks like they are trying to justify the valuation of their assets to stave off bankruptcy. No project in the works = no potential value.

Is this connected to NAMA?

waterfordcity.ie/ePlan41/Fil … LASiteID=0

waterfordcity.ie/ePlan41/Fil … LASiteID=0

Parker Green Waterford also seeking that last refuge of the scoundrel : Turn your prime, derelict city centre site into a car park :unamused:

Yes, NAMA gives higher values to sites with planning in place. No matter how ridiculous. Hence the airports on Skellig Michael, the ferry terminal in Mullingar with plans for a ship canal to link up with the floating spaceport in Lough Ree. I believe they turned their noses up at the vertical hash farm in the former Anglo HQ…

This article fails to differentiate between a shopping centre and an outlet centre. There is room for an outlet centre in the south/south east - I think TK Maxx need a new home because their retail park store in Waterford had to close for example. Parker Green’s proposal has merit - it would be largely short-term lease and turnover related rents which appeal to the retailers who have outlets.
Yoganmahew - the Nama valuations are based on what loans were worth on a certain date last year (end of October) are they not. Subsequent changes should not affect valuations.

I hate to be a broken record on this, but:

How can someone who doesn’t have a tax clearance certificate be a company Director ??? :nin

Fucking hells bells, when are these goons going to get over their cargo cult mentality.

I don’t believe so. I believe the reference price is what the market level was at in October 2009, not what the loans were actually worth. This is conjecture on my part, maybe namawinelake can shed more light?

There has been an avalanche of planning permissions pushed through (or attempts to push them through) for schemes that are clearly not viable (three town centres for Tullamore with masses of apartments, for example).

Perhaps it doesn’t make a difference to the NAMA price, but to the offload price?
gombeennation.blogspot.com/2010/ … b-for.html

You can try and make head or tail of the EU guidelines:
ec.europa.eu/competition/state_a … assets.pdf

Precisely, it would be valued as a development site with no planning, not a site with outlet planning permission. So I don’t think it matters what happens subsequent to the valuation date. In my view, a lot of the planning applications are in part because the banks would have committed facilities to fund them. No way would Nama give money to pay for planning applications - they’d try to find a way of getting out of them.

We have some interesting stuff Sunday - not directly Nama related at this stage

You have no idea the shit that is going on in NAMA. The deep murky in the gutter quiet payback shit. :nin

Tell us more!

Getting planning permission may have a valuation impact but also may influence NAMA when deciding on your business plan.

NAMA-bound land would have its actual current market value (CMV) assessed as at 30th November, 2009. At that time, some projects would have been fields with a prospect of planning permission. That prospect would have been assigned a probability and the land valued accordingly. You’d need to consult the RICS Red Book rules to see how post-valuation date events after 30th November, 2009 are assessed - I might get a chance to dust it off today and will come back to you.

So the recent surge (anecdotally, irelandafternama has an article which I link below in addition to your own and other observations) in planning applications might be to do with valuations or it might be the me first! approach to NAMA business plans. If the project has planning permission, it should be worth more, it may secure the developer in work and to a limited extent funds (though NAMA’s funds are extremely limited - the €2.5bn euro commercial programme has just been kicked off and there are likely to be massive demands on this) and overall may mean the developer gets a better return (or less debt) and possibly employment with planning permission.

Let me come back to you on post 30th November, 2009 events influencing values.

irelandafternama.wordpress.com/2 … assembled/

No, what I mean is there’s:

  • a reference price for land in Cavan with no planning
  • a reference price for land in Cavan with planning (10-15% uplift)
    based on what those prices were in 2009.

For a loan that is transferred, the assets are examined and slotted into one of the reference valuations, but it is the state of the assets at the time of transfer that is relevant, not the state they were in in September 2009 - who knows what this is anyway!

Good point. Particularly since the tax clearance certificate is required if you are to have any contracts with the government. So no NAMA for them eh?

I can dream can’t I?

No requirement for company directors to have a tax clrarance cert

Will get this clarified this week.

Excellent, thank you.

It would be good to have some clarity on this as the whole reference date and CMV are melting my head.

I spoke to one of the developers in tranche 3 today and he says I’m correct. Anything that happened since November 1 isn’t included so lettings he’s agreed since aren’t included in income and therefore to valuations. The same applies to planning permissions.

Thank you. Right then, so we’re left with a pickle, wrapped in a mystery, wrapped in a conundrum.

Why is every white elephant project that was conceived in the bubble being pushed through the planning process?

Again, the banks would have agreed to fund the planning application fees as part of the loan facilities. Better for the developer to push them through before the bank tries to withdraw the facility for breach of terms.