> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.dublininquirer.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # Andy: Why It Matters Who We Owe Money To - URL: https://www.dublininquirer.com/andy-why-it-matters-who-we-owe-money-to/ - Published: 2017-04-12T23:16:06.000Z - Updated: 2017-04-11T23:16:00.000Z - Description: From shopping centres to agriculture, we’re beginning to see why it matters that vulture funds have such a presence here, writes UCD lecturer Andy Storey. - Author: Andy Storey - Tags: Opinion, #wp, #wp-post, #Import 2025-03-05 15:28 “Deputy \[Ruth\] Coppinger criticised me for not intervening with what she described as vulture funds. The investment companies in question may be colloquially known as vulture funds but it was, in the first instance, a compliment when they were so dubbed in the United States where vultures provide a very good service in the ecology through cleaning up dead animals that are littered across the landscape, especially in the prairie provinces.” —Minister for Finance Michael Noonan, [2016](http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/committeetakes/CHH2016050500002?ref=dublininquirer.com) \*\*\* Retailers at two of Dublin’s largest shopping centres – Blanchardstown and Dundrum – are [facing](https://www.businesspost.ie/news/fear-retail-carnage-vulture-funds-turn-screw-tenants-384632?ref=dublininquirer.com) rent increases as vulture funds and others seek to generate quick profits from the malls they purchased off NAMA. According to a representative of retailers, as [reported](https://www.businesspost.ie/news/fear-retail-carnage-vulture-funds-turn-screw-tenants-384632?ref=dublininquirer.com) in the *Sunday Business Post*, “They \[the new owners\] are digging their heels in and are enforcing upward-only rent review clauses with a view to flipping the property on and turning a quick profit.” The upward-only rent reviews that the vultures are making use of were banned in 2010 – but only for *new* leases. The contracts attached to these shopping centres allow the [practice](https://www.businesspost.ie/news/fear-retail-carnage-vulture-funds-turn-screw-tenants-384632?ref=dublininquirer.com) to continue. As documented in my last [column](http://www.dublininquirer.com/2017/03/28/andy-heres-way-solve-housing-shortage/), the profits thus earned can be spectacular and probably represent substantial losses for the taxpayer relative to what could have been earned for the state if NAMA had held onto the properties for even a little longer. This point has since been backed up by economist Constantin Gurdgiev, who [concludes](https://www.businesspost.ie/opinion/nama-missed-opportunity-profits-paying-price-384584?ref=dublininquirer.com) that “these foregone returns are a loss to the taxpayer – and a gain to the, predominantly, vulture investors”. What the shopping-centre story illustrates (and many others, including the Liffey Valley are also affected) is that this model has ripple effects beyond simple taxpayer losses, in this case impacting on rents and consumer prices. The vultures are not only making life hard for Dublin retailers and consumers. [According](http://www.thejournal.ie/farmers-vulture-funds-3329461-Apr2017/?ref=dublininquirer.com) to a representative of the Irish Farmers’ Association, vulture funds are adopting a “short-term and ruthless approach to farmers whose loans they have acquired”, seeking to generate a short-term profit rather than facilitate longer-term restructuring that might allow the agricultural businesses survive and thrive. According to Sinn Fein Finance [spokesperson](http://www.thejournal.ie/farmers-vulture-funds-3329461-Apr2017/?ref=dublininquirer.com) Pearse Doherty, who has introduced legislation to try and better regulate the sector, “the vultures are wreaking havoc on our economy and communities. The policy of empowering them must be stopped.” None of this should come as a surprise. Almost a year ago, I [asked](http://www.dublininquirer.com/2016/05/10/andy-the-vulture-funds-are-picking-our-bones/), vis-à-vis the vultures, “Does it matter to the debtor to whom they owe the money?” and answered that “It does if the new creditor is more likely than the old one to aggressively pursue repayment and eviction.” A growing number of retailers and farmers, as well as homeowners and tenants, are experiencing that now. In that [column](http://www.dublininquirer.com/2016/05/10/andy-the-vulture-funds-are-picking-our-bones/), I highlighted (building, as I often do, on [research](http://debtireland.org/download/pdf/ddci%5Fvulture%5Ffunds%5Freport.pdf?ref=dublininquirer.com) by Michael Byrne) the prominent role played by the Irish Residential Real Estate Investment Trust (Ires, part-owned by vulture fund Fir Tree). Ires became the biggest single landlord in Ireland when it bought an enormous quantity of property (at a discount, of course) from NAMA, and it soon announced that it would seek to implement rent increases across the board of 20 percent. Ires (or [Ires Reit](https://www.iresreit.ie/about-us/?ref=dublininquirer.com)) now has [over](http://www.irishtimes.com/business/commercial-property/council-knocks-back-ires-reit-plan-for-sandyford-flats-1.2972856?ref=dublininquirer.com) 2,300 apartments across Dublin, and, as promised, does indeed seem [to](http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/ires-reit-the-facts-behind-ireland-s-biggest-landlord-1.2749116?ref=dublininquirer.com) have notched up substantial rent increases in the capital in 2016. The company was in the [news](https://www.businesspost.ie/opinion/land-dont-planning-384582?ref=dublininquirer.com) again last week when Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council turned down its application to build 465 apartments in Sandyford on land it had acquired from NAMA. Whatever the merits of that particular Sandyford scheme, the situation focuses our attention on one of the core choices facing Irish housing. Do we rely on private firms to solve our problems, firms that have made fortunes from buying discounted public land or property and jacking up rents but that simply will not [deliver](http://www.engineersjournal.ie/2017/02/28/rebuilding-ireland-housing-crisis/?ref=dublininquirer.com) the affordable housing we desperately need? Firms that, according to a council report, [delivered](https://www.dublincity.ie/councilmeetings/documents/s9408/93%20Housing%20Supply.pdf?ref=dublininquirer.com) just 25 public housing units in 2016 in the Dublin City Council area. Or do we explore an alternative [model](http://www.dublininquirer.com/2017/03/28/andy-heres-way-solve-housing-shortage/), such as a state-owned [Housing Corporation of Ireland](http://www.nerinstitute.net/research/irelands-housing-emergency-time-for-a-game-changer/?ref=dublininquirer.com) that could more prudently manage the public’s land and property, supply large quantities of affordable and environmentally sustainable housing, and ensure both reasonable rents and security of tenure?