View Full Version : ABSD: Questions that beg for answers
I am not sure what this guy is talking about really. Can only guess he is writing this on behalf of REDAS and the real estate industry.
ABSD: Questions that beg for answers
The need for moderating investment inflow seems to contradict several tenets that have brought Singapore its success
By KU SWEE YONG
IT IS more than a month since the introduction of the additional buyer's stamp duty (ABSD). I am still scratching my head on the whys.
Some buyers have held back their decisions thinking that perhaps prices might fall while others have stepped away for now because their cash-on-cash returns drop if they have to pay the ABSD. We have also read about buyers not exercising their options for Bedok Residences, Archipelago and The Palette.
On the flip side, some sellers have withdrawn their intentions to sell their residential investments because they would not be able to reinvest their cash into another residential unit without having to incur the ABSD.
The secondary market, already quiet in 2011, will be reduced to a whimper in 2012. The number of units sold by developers is also expected to be lower, as some investors wait out for lower prices or look for alternative sectors to invest into.
In explaining the rationale for the ABSD, Tharman Shanmugaratnam, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance and Manpower, said in a Dec 7, 2011, press release: 'We have always had open markets and must keep them that way. However, the reality is that investment flows into our property market are now larger than before, and unlikely to recede as long as interest rates remain low. The additional buyer's stamp duty should help cool investment demand, and avoid the prospect of a major, destabilising correction further down the road.'
Minister of State for Manpower and National Development Tan Chuan-Jin reiterated at the Redas 52nd Anniversary Dinner on Dec 27, 2011: 'Given volatile equity markets and a worsening economic situation in Europe, our small property market is attractive to foreign funds. The latest measure is a targeted and measured move to moderate such investment demand in order to avoid the need for a major correction down the road.'
The need for moderating investment inflow seems to contradict several tenets that have brought Singapore its success. The last I checked, on the Economic Development Board's website, Singapore held a string of accolades including the top spot 'for having the most open economy for international trade and investment', as ranked by the Global Enabling Trade Report 2010 published by the World Economic Forum.
Now, where and what are the sources of 'investment flows into our property market' and 'foreign funds'? And what is the exact cause for concern to the government that this lopsided ABSD is applied to foreign investors specifically targeting the residential segment and not any other asset classes? Furthermore, there were certain exclusions and permutations which now add complexity to our otherwise rather simple and clear tax system.
We begin by looking at foreigners' purchase of residential units with caveats filed in 2011. Do note that we are limited to the data provided by the Urban Redevelopment Authority's Realis (Real Estate Information System). For purposes of this article, I have assumed that permanent residents (PRs) who purchased homes in Singapore are neither a source of 'foreign funds' nor inward investment flow. Although we know there are PRs who are active in their home countries and who have invested in Singapore's residential properties, let us take it that these PRs' monies are considered local. We narrow our focus on the transactions by foreigners and by companies.
Foreign purchasers
With Singapore's push to develop its trust and fund management services capabilities, the bulk of residential transactions under company name is due to foreign purchasers. Our experience shows that Singaporean investors purchasing properties through companies are few and far between but foreigners, especially those who are planning their wealth transfer in Singapore, are more amenable to invest in properties via trusts, foundations, offshore companies or Singapore entities. There were also foreign private equity funds that invest into Singapore's residential properties such as the collective investments made through the private banks on behalf of their clients.
In 2011, foreigners accounted for 4,939 transactions (or 17.3 per cent of the total for that year) while company-registered purchases accounted for 704 units (2.4 per cent). In comparison, the number of units purchased by foreigners in 2007 was slightly higher at 5,038 (13.1 per cent) while company transactions were much higher at 2,681 units (7.0 per cent). The recent sharp drop in company transactions was caused by government policies restricting the loan-to-value ratio for residential properties purchased under company names and a pullout of real estate funds post-Lehman crisis, for example Wachovia, Citadel. With the introduction of 10 per cent ABSD for residential units purchased under company name, we can expect the numbers to drop further in 2012.
Note that 5,038 residential units (13 per cent of total units) were purchased by foreigners in 2007 at a time when the foreigner population was 1.005 million (22 per cent of total population) while in 2011, foreigners purchased 4,939 units (17 per cent of total units) and the foreigner population is 1.394 million (27 per cent of total population). Foreigner population in our midst increased 39 per cent between 2011 and 2007 but yet the number of units purchased by foreigners remained steady despite a small increase in percentage terms.
There is no easy way of correlating these data points as there are foreigners who purchased homes in Singapore and who do not live in Singapore. On another hand, foreigner population includes those on dependent passes, student passes, etc.
In order to address the concern about funds inflow, we need to examine the dollar value of residential purchases made by foreigners.
In absolute value terms, foreigners accounted for $10.2 billion of investments into the residential segment in 2007. Adding on the value of transactions made by companies, the total is $18.2 billion. In contrast, against a weak external environment, the investment inflow by foreigners in 2011 accounted for $8.5 billion while company transactions accounted for $1.9 billion. The total is less than $10.4 billion. In fact, the total in 2010 was higher at $12.7 billion (foreigner and company).
Elsewhere in the Singapore real estate scene, funds also flowed into office and retail segments as well as en bloc sales of residential projects. In 2007, $11 billion worth of block deals were inked in the office and retail segments versus $7 billion in 2011. En bloc sales of residential projects totalled $12 billion in 2007 versus the paltry tally of under $3 billion for 2011. Those tracking the market since the 2007 peak will remember that the bulk of these transactions was due to foreign funds and insurance companies.
Developers from Malaysia and China also featured strongly in the en bloc and Government Land Sales arena.
We saw a lot more foreign monies buying into Singapore in 2007 than in 2010 or in 2011. In terms of the number of residential units, 2007 also saw more purchases by foreigners and companies than in 2010 or in 2011.
The analysis generated more questions than answers. Were we similarly concerned about foreign investment inflow in 2007 as compared to now? What is the current stock of residential properties owned by foreigners and is foreign ownership growing at a pace that we should be concerned?
Where is the evidence for foreign money that is anticipated to flow in? Will the total value surpass the $20-40 billion that we saw in 2007? Should we be concerned that the foreign monies may disrupt other real estate segments such as industrial or office?
Should we be concerned that foreign monies may come in strongly on other asset classes - debt, equities, etc? Why did we not curb foreign purchasers with other methods, for example limiting the loan-to-value ratio for their second-home purchase? Are we making Singapore less of a home for the high-skilled foreign families, say biotech researchers, who have been contributing to our economy and now want to buy a home for themselves to settle down for the long term?
Will we maintain our position in the eyes of international investors?
The writer is founder of real estate agency International Property Advisory (IPA). He is also the author of the book 'Real Estate Riches'
This article addresses much of the foreign funds coming in our country... my question remains... as much as the influx of foreign funds remain an indicator of how open our economy operates, the allowance given to local investors to play in our housing market serves as an indicator on the internal stability (at least on housing matters) of the country. It is one thing to discourage foreigners from investing in our property market which already reflects poorly on our governance of housing matters, it is another thing altogether to discourage Singaporeans from investing in our own property market which reflects the lack of fore sight in looking after our citizens. I feel strongly that locals should not be penalized from buying 3rd or subsequent properties because this is our home. If ABSD is imposed on local investors, we are merely pushing these investors overseas, suggesting that our country will not want to look after local investors. :beats-me-man:
Some people may argue that the country does not owe us an investment opportunity and I'm not asking for that. Not asking for help from government. Just asking no further restrictions. Just leave the private housing affairs private, at least for the locals. :cheers5:
[1] The reality? 2011 is much less than 2007! Furthermore, there are even more fund inflow into office, commercial, and industrial properties!
Why no ABSD for them?
Why no ABSD for the companies buying them?
These REITS and companies are monopolizing the whole of these properties and results in ultra-high inflation due to rampant jacking up of rents which then end up being passed to consumers like us!!! Why don't they do something which is so serious now rather than target something that didn't even happened? :banghead:
[2] our small property (especially office, commercial and industrial properties) market is attractive to foreign funds! Why no cooling for the office, commercial, and industrial properties??? :(
[3] Why REITS (foreigners included) can buy so many commercial and office and industrial properties with no penalty and yet citizens are being penalized for investing in residential properties? REITS and foreigners can be landlords of many many commercial, office, and industrial properties, and yet citizens cannot be landlords of many many private residential properties? :mad:
[4] Why they care about private residential properties? That is just a small market of <20% of number of properties in Singapore! Why they don't seem to care about that 80% of HDB properties instead which is already over bubbles stage for those DBSS HDB flats and resale HDB flats? They shooting at wrong thing? :tsk-tsk:
[5] If we look at the data, it is actually citizens who are causing OCR property prices to shoot through the roof! Not foreigners! And they aim at foreigners instead? :scared-3: :doh:
[6] Regardless of what has been said, the ABSD is a sort of capital control! Bad for Singapore! We just need to look at Malaysia after capital controls! Only idiot Singaporeans now still go there to invest money, other foreigners simply shunt as you won't know when they will do the same again.
This article addresses much of the foreign funds coming in our country... my question remains... as much as the influx of foreign funds remain an indicator of how open our economy operates, the allowance given to local investors to play in our housing market serves as an indicator on the internal stability (at least on housing matters) of the country. It is one thing to discourage foreigners from investing in our property market which already reflects poorly on our governance of housing matters, it is another thing altogether to discourage Singaporeans from investing in our own property market which reflects the lack of fore sight in looking after our citizens. I feel strongly that locals should not be penalized from buying 3rd or subsequent properties because this is our home. If ABSD is imposed on local investors, we are merely pushing these investors overseas, suggesting that our country will not want to look after local investors. :beats-me-man:
Some people may argue that the country does not owe us an investment opportunity and I'm not asking for that. Not asking for help from government. Just asking no further restrictions. Just leave the private housing affairs private, at least for the locals. :cheers5:
ABSD: Questions that beg for answers
The need for moderating investment inflow seems to contradict several tenets that have brought Singapore its success
By KU SWEE YONG
IT IS more than a month since the introduction of the additional buyer's stamp duty (ABSD). I am still scratching my head on the whys.
Some buyers have held back their decisions thinking that perhaps prices might fall while others have stepped away for now because their cash-on-cash returns drop if they have to pay the ABSD. We have also read about buyers not exercising their options for Bedok Residences, Archipelago and The Palette.
On the flip side, some sellers have withdrawn their intentions to sell their residential investments because they would not be able to reinvest their cash into another residential unit without having to incur the ABSD.
The secondary market, already quiet in 2011, will be reduced to a whimper in 2012. The number of units sold by developers is also expected to be lower, as some investors wait out for lower prices or look for alternative sectors to invest into.
In explaining the rationale for the ABSD, Tharman Shanmugaratnam, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance and Manpower, said in a Dec 7, 2011, press release: 'We have always had open markets and must keep them that way. However, [1] the reality is that investment flows into our property market are now larger than before, and unlikely to recede as long as interest rates remain low. The additional buyer's stamp duty should help cool investment demand, and avoid the prospect of a major, destabilising correction further down the road.'
Minister of State for Manpower and National Development Tan Chuan-Jin reiterated at the Redas 52nd Anniversary Dinner on Dec 27, 2011: 'Given volatile equity markets and a worsening economic situation in Europe, our small property market is attractive to foreign funds. The latest measure is a targeted and measured move to moderate such investment demand in order to avoid the need for a major correction down the road.'
[6] The need for moderating investment inflow seems to contradict several tenets that have brought Singapore its success. The last I checked, on the Economic Development Board's website, Singapore held a string of accolades including the top spot 'for having the most open economy for international trade and investment', as ranked by the Global Enabling Trade Report 2010 published by the World Economic Forum.
Now, where and what are the sources of 'investment flows into our property market' and 'foreign funds'? And what is the exact cause for concern to the government that this lopsided ABSD is applied to foreign investors specifically targeting the residential segment and not any other asset classes? Furthermore, there were certain exclusions and permutations which now add complexity to our otherwise rather simple and clear tax system.
We begin by looking at foreigners' purchase of residential units with caveats filed in 2011. Do note that we are limited to the data provided by the Urban Redevelopment Authority's Realis (Real Estate Information System). For purposes of this article, I have assumed that permanent residents (PRs) who purchased homes in Singapore are neither a source of 'foreign funds' nor inward investment flow. Although we know there are PRs who are active in their home countries and who have invested in Singapore's residential properties, let us take it that these PRs' monies are considered local. We narrow our focus on the transactions by foreigners and by companies.
Foreign purchasers
With Singapore's push to develop its trust and fund management services capabilities, the bulk of residential transactions under company name is due to foreign purchasers. Our experience shows that Singaporean investors purchasing properties through companies are few and far between but foreigners, especially those who are planning their wealth transfer in Singapore, are more amenable to invest in properties via trusts, foundations, offshore companies or Singapore entities. There were also foreign private equity funds that invest into Singapore's residential properties such as the collective investments made through the private banks on behalf of their clients.
In 2011, foreigners accounted for 4,939 transactions (or 17.3 per cent of the total for that year) while company-registered purchases accounted for 704 units (2.4 per cent). In comparison, the number of units purchased by foreigners in 2007 was slightly higher at 5,038 (13.1 per cent) while company transactions were much higher at 2,681 units (7.0 per cent). The recent sharp drop in company transactions was caused by government policies restricting the loan-to-value ratio for residential properties purchased under company names and a pullout of real estate funds post-Lehman crisis, for example Wachovia, Citadel. With the introduction of 10 per cent ABSD for residential units purchased under company name, we can expect the numbers to drop further in 2012.
Note that 5,038 residential units (13 per cent of total units) were purchased by foreigners in 2007 at a time when the foreigner population was 1.005 million (22 per cent of total population) while in 2011, foreigners purchased 4,939 units (17 per cent of total units) and the foreigner population is 1.394 million (27 per cent of total population). Foreigner population in our midst increased 39 per cent between 2011 and 2007 but yet the number of units purchased by foreigners remained steady despite a small increase in percentage terms.
There is no easy way of correlating these data points as there are foreigners who purchased homes in Singapore and who do not live in Singapore. On another hand, foreigner population includes those on dependent passes, student passes, etc.
In order to address the concern about funds inflow, we need to examine the dollar value of residential purchases made by foreigners.
In absolute value terms, foreigners accounted for $10.2 billion of investments into the residential segment in 2007. Adding on the value of transactions made by companies, the total is $18.2 billion. In contrast, against a weak external environment, the investment inflow by foreigners in 2011 accounted for $8.5 billion while company transactions accounted for $1.9 billion. The total is less than $10.4 billion. In fact, the total in 2010 was higher at $12.7 billion (foreigner and company).
Elsewhere in the Singapore real estate scene, funds also flowed into office and retail segments as well as en bloc sales of residential projects. In 2007, $11 billion worth of block deals were inked in the office and retail segments versus $7 billion in 2011. En bloc sales of residential projects totalled $12 billion in 2007 versus the paltry tally of under $3 billion for 2011. Those tracking the market since the 2007 peak will remember that the bulk of these transactions was due to foreign funds and insurance companies.
Developers from Malaysia and China also featured strongly in the en bloc and Government Land Sales arena.
[8] We saw a lot more foreign monies buying into Singapore in 2007 than in 2010 or in 2011. In terms of the number of residential units, 2007 also saw more purchases by foreigners and companies than in 2010 or in 2011.
The analysis generated more questions than answers. Were we similarly concerned about foreign investment inflow in 2007 as compared to now? What is the current stock of residential properties owned by foreigners and is foreign ownership growing at a pace that we should be concerned?
Where is the evidence for foreign money that is anticipated to flow in? Will the total value surpass the $20-40 billion that we saw in 2007? Should we be concerned that the foreign monies may disrupt other real estate segments such as industrial or office?
Should we be concerned that foreign monies may come in strongly on other asset classes - debt, equities, etc? Why did we not curb foreign purchasers with other methods, for example limiting the loan-to-value ratio for their second-home purchase? Are we making Singapore less of a home for the high-skilled foreign families, say biotech researchers, who have been contributing to our economy and now want to buy a home for themselves to settle down for the long term?
Will we maintain our position in the eyes of international investors?
The writer is founder of real estate agency International Property Advisory (IPA). He is also the author of the book 'Real Estate Riches'
ABSD: Questions that beg for answers
The need for moderating investment inflow seems to contradict several tenets that have brought Singapore its success
By KU SWEE YONG
IT IS more than a month since the introduction of the additional buyer's stamp duty (ABSD). I am still scratching my head on the whys.
Some buyers have held back their decisions thinking that perhaps prices might fall while others have stepped away for now because their cash-on-cash returns drop if they have to pay the ABSD. We have also read about buyers not exercising their options for Bedok Residences, Archipelago and The Palette.
On the flip side, some sellers have withdrawn their intentions to sell their residential investments because they would not be able to reinvest their cash into another residential unit without having to incur the ABSD.
The secondary market, already quiet in 2011, will be reduced to a whimper in 2012. The number of units sold by developers is also expected to be lower, as some investors wait out for lower prices or look for alternative sectors to invest into.
In explaining the rationale for the ABSD, Tharman Shanmugaratnam, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance and Manpower, said in a Dec 7, 2011, press release: 'We have always had open markets and must keep them that way. However, [1] the reality is that investment flows into our property market are now larger than before, and unlikely to recede as long as interest rates remain low. The additional buyer's stamp duty should help cool investment demand, and avoid the prospect of a major, destabilising correction further down the road.'
Minister of State for Manpower and National Development Tan Chuan-Jin reiterated at the Redas 52nd Anniversary Dinner on Dec 27, 2011: 'Given volatile equity markets and a worsening economic situation in Europe, our small property market is attractive to foreign funds. The latest measure is a targeted and measured move to moderate such investment demand in order to avoid the need for a major correction down the road.'
[6] The need for moderating investment inflow seems to contradict several tenets that have brought Singapore its success. The last I checked, on the Economic Development Board's website, Singapore held a string of accolades including the top spot 'for having the most open economy for international trade and investment', as ranked by the Global Enabling Trade Report 2010 published by the World Economic Forum.
Now, where and what are the sources of 'investment flows into our property market' and 'foreign funds'? And what is the exact cause for concern to the government that this lopsided ABSD is applied to foreign investors specifically targeting the residential segment and not any other asset classes? Furthermore, there were certain exclusions and permutations which now add complexity to our otherwise rather simple and clear tax system.
We begin by looking at foreigners' purchase of residential units with caveats filed in 2011. Do note that we are limited to the data provided by the Urban Redevelopment Authority's Realis (Real Estate Information System). For purposes of this article, I have assumed that permanent residents (PRs) who purchased homes in Singapore are neither a source of 'foreign funds' nor inward investment flow. Although we know there are PRs who are active in their home countries and who have invested in Singapore's residential properties, let us take it that these PRs' monies are considered local. We narrow our focus on the transactions by foreigners and by companies.
Foreign purchasers
With Singapore's push to develop its trust and fund management services capabilities, the bulk of residential transactions under company name is due to foreign purchasers. Our experience shows that Singaporean investors purchasing properties through companies are few and far between but foreigners, especially those who are planning their wealth transfer in Singapore, are more amenable to invest in properties via trusts, foundations, offshore companies or Singapore entities. There were also foreign private equity funds that invest into Singapore's residential properties such as the collective investments made through the private banks on behalf of their clients.
In 2011, foreigners accounted for 4,939 transactions (or 17.3 per cent of the total for that year) while company-registered purchases accounted for 704 units (2.4 per cent). In comparison, the number of units purchased by foreigners in 2007 was slightly higher at 5,038 (13.1 per cent) while company transactions were much higher at 2,681 units (7.0 per cent). The recent sharp drop in company transactions was caused by government policies restricting the loan-to-value ratio for residential properties purchased under company names and a pullout of real estate funds post-Lehman crisis, for example Wachovia, Citadel. With the introduction of 10 per cent ABSD for residential units purchased under company name, we can expect the numbers to drop further in 2012.
Note that 5,038 residential units (13 per cent of total units) were purchased by foreigners in 2007 at a time when the foreigner population was 1.005 million (22 per cent of total population) while in 2011, foreigners purchased 4,939 units (17 per cent of total units) and the foreigner population is 1.394 million (27 per cent of total population). Foreigner population in our midst increased 39 per cent between 2011 and 2007 but yet the number of units purchased by foreigners remained steady despite a small increase in percentage terms.
There is no easy way of correlating these data points as there are foreigners who purchased homes in Singapore and who do not live in Singapore. On another hand, foreigner population includes those on dependent passes, student passes, etc.
In order to address the concern about funds inflow, we need to examine the dollar value of residential purchases made by foreigners.
In absolute value terms, foreigners accounted for $10.2 billion of investments into the residential segment in 2007. Adding on the value of transactions made by companies, the total is $18.2 billion. In contrast, against a weak external environment, the investment inflow by foreigners in 2011 accounted for $8.5 billion while company transactions accounted for $1.9 billion. The total is less than $10.4 billion. In fact, the total in 2010 was higher at $12.7 billion (foreigner and company).
Elsewhere in the Singapore real estate scene, funds also flowed into office and retail segments as well as en bloc sales of residential projects. In 2007, $11 billion worth of block deals were inked in the office and retail segments versus $7 billion in 2011. En bloc sales of residential projects totalled $12 billion in 2007 versus the paltry tally of under $3 billion for 2011. Those tracking the market since the 2007 peak will remember that the bulk of these transactions was due to foreign funds and insurance companies.
Developers from Malaysia and China also featured strongly in the en bloc and Government Land Sales arena.
[8] We saw a lot more foreign monies buying into Singapore in 2007 than in 2010 or in 2011. In terms of the number of residential units, 2007 also saw more purchases by foreigners and companies than in 2010 or in 2011.
The analysis generated more questions than answers. Were we similarly concerned about foreign investment inflow in 2007 as compared to now? What is the current stock of residential properties owned by foreigners and is foreign ownership growing at a pace that we should be concerned?
Where is the evidence for foreign money that is anticipated to flow in? Will the total value surpass the $20-40 billion that we saw in 2007? Should we be concerned that the foreign monies may disrupt other real estate segments such as industrial or office?
Should we be concerned that foreign monies may come in strongly on other asset classes - debt, equities, etc? Why did we not curb foreign purchasers with other methods, for example limiting the loan-to-value ratio for their second-home purchase? Are we making Singapore less of a home for the high-skilled foreign families, say biotech researchers, who have been contributing to our economy and now want to buy a home for themselves to settle down for the long term?
Will we maintain our position in the eyes of international investors?
The writer is founder of real estate agency International Property Advisory (IPA). He is also the author of the book 'Real Estate Riches'[/quote]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
resale market as always mentioned : dead meat liao...:o
one simple line to rebut him..
what brought spore success in the past may not bring the same success in the future; don't live in the past. :D
What has been most profitable in the past will become unprofitable in the future!
Which segment gone up so much means will come down by 2/3 as much! :D
Resale HDB flats
ECs
OCR mass market condos!
one simple line to rebut him..
what brought spore success in the past may not bring the same success in the future; don't live in the past. :D
What has been most profitable in the past will become unprofitable in the future!
Which segment gone up so much means will come down by 2/3 as much! :D
Resale HDB flats
ECs
OCR mass market condos!
I think Ku swee yong is a CEO of a IPA...renowned for specialising in investments(high end property) for high net worth individuals ...:o
Still, he provide facts and raw data which are convincing! I only believe in raw data!
I don't believe in "statistics", or worse, statements only (regardless of who spoke those) like "the reality is blah blah blah..." and then what? We found that "the reality ..." is not "reality" because 2007 foreigners' investment absolute $$$ is so much more than 2011 even before taking into consideration inflation!!! They implement policy with no hard data to back up? :doh:
I think Ku swee yong is a CEO of a IPA...renowned for specialising in investments(high end property) for high net worth individuals ...:o
one simple line to rebut him..
what brought spore success in the past may not bring the same success in the future; don't live in the past. :D
Comparing hot money flowing into real estate to those multi-billion dollar EDB FDIs that create tenths of thousands of high skill jobs is just idiotic
The gist of his article is simple. He is questioning the real underlying motive behind the ABSD since the facts and figures he provided seem to run counter to what has been published. Also this measure is unique as it was announced by BOTH the Finance minister as well as MND. Go figure.
My fear is URA will now reduce the data available on REALIS. just like how HDB restrict the information on COV.
u see , now Pxx is in the mercy of voters....
It appears to me that the main objective of the ABSD is more to deter foreigners from buying into mass market segment. These foreigners though not big in number (about 25 to 30% as reported) could distort prices given the hot property market. They are likely to buy at "asking prices" during prelaunches or in the secondary market. Their numbers is enough to create anxiety within this segment of the market and induce locals to enter the market for fear that prices will increase further.
The mass market segment is the utmost concern to the government to make homes more affordable.
It appears to me that the main objective of the ABSD is more to deter foreigners from buying into mass market segment. These foreigners though not big in number (about 25 to 30% as reported) could distort prices given the hot property market. They are likely to buy at "asking prices" during prelaunches or in the secondary market. Their numbers is enough to create anxiety within this segment of the market and induce locals to enter the market for fear that prices will increase further.
The mass market segment is the utmost concern to the government to make homes more affordable.
However ccr luxury market is the worst hit
However ccr luxury market is the worst hit
u are most probably rite about this, come out from the horse mouth (the article's author):o
Still, he provide facts and raw data which are convincing! I only believe in raw data!
I don't believe in "statistics", or worse, statements only (regardless of who spoke those) like "the reality is blah blah blah..." and then what? We found that "the reality ..." is not "reality" because 2007 foreigners' investment absolute $$$ is so much more than 2011 even before taking into consideration inflation!!! They implement policy with no hard data to back up? :doh:
they are the game master mah...they set the rule to play.:p
Still, he provide facts and raw data which are convincing! I only believe in raw data!
I don't believe in "statistics", or worse, statements only (regardless of who spoke those) like "the reality is blah blah blah..." and then what? We found that "the reality ..." is not "reality" because 2007 foreigners' investment absolute $$$ is so much more than 2011 even before taking into consideration inflation!!! They implement policy with no hard data to back up? :doh:
statistic never lie, but those who use them often do.
Take this article for example, what he stated was facts, BUT there are also other facts that are not stated as well.
In absolute value terms, foreigners accounted for $10.2 billion of investments into the residential segment in 2007. Adding on the value of transactions made by companies, the total is $18.2 billion. In contrast, against a weak external environment, the investment inflow by foreigners in 2011 accounted for $8.5 billion while company transactions accounted for $1.9 billion. The total is less than $10.4 billion. In fact, the total in 2010 was higher at $12.7 billion (foreigner and company).
In his article, he only compare the absolute amount without consider the percentage of the total pie. In 2007, during the peak of the property boom, foreigners only account for 16% of the total purchase, in 2011 foreigners accounts for 20% of the total purchase, a 25% jump from 2010 when foreign purchase was only 15%.
In 2007, the average price of unit purchase by foreigner is $2.03m, in 2011, it is $1.75m. Is there a trend that foreigners moving away from luxury into the midend and mass market which will create a bigger impact on average Singaporeans who dream of owning private property.
what was no highlighted in the article is that in 2010, there was a 45% jump in foreigner transaction volume against 2009 vs the overall increase of 15% in 2010, and in 2011, we again see a 14% increase in foreigners buying volume against 2010 vs a 23% overall decline.
If there are no ABSD, could we assume that foreigner buying interest in Singapore property will continue to increase even when local buying are retreating due to poor economic conditions and existing cooling measures?
1. Yah right, didn't I say that before? Foreigners moving to OCR, particularly the China's Chinese? Otherwise how to explain OCR selling average $1350 psf? The easiest is to ban all foreigners from buying OCR properties or they can't buy anything below $1.5m! They have free choice anywhere else, still Ok right? (rather than also kill the CCR when the price didn't move and transactions are already low enough. Shouldn't they just aim & directly root of the problem? It is just like If 1 area in house got termite they tear down the whole house to rebuild? :doh: ). :p
But anyway, while lamenting unfairness, I like it because I am waiting to buy more! :D
2. Consider the %age pie? To be fair, you also need to consider the number of foreigners as well, as we know, there is big surge in 2011 from 2007! PRs are also considered as foreigners right (legally in terms of voting rights)?
3. Compare 2011 to 2009? Not fair without comparing 2007 to 2005. I can tell you 2007 is much much worst! :p
4. How about you ask about commercial, industrial and office properties that they cause the huge ultra-inflation? :scared-2:
statistic never lie, but those who use them often do.
Take this article for example, what he stated was facts, BUT there are also other facts that are not stated as well.
In his article, he only compare the absolute amount without consider the percentage of the total pie. In 2007, during the peak of the property boom, foreigners only account for 16% of the total purchase, in 2011 foreigners accounts for 20% of the total purchase, a 25% jump from 2010 when foreign purchase was only 15%.
In 2007, the average price of unit purchase by foreigner is $2.03m, in 2011, it is $1.75m. Is there a trend that foreigners moving away from luxury into the midend and mass market which will create a bigger impact on average Singaporeans who dream of owning private property.
what was no highlighted in the article is that in 2010, there was a 45% jump in foreigner transaction volume against 2009 vs the overall increase of 15% in 2010, and in 2011, we again see a 14% increase in foreigners buying volume against 2010 vs a 23% overall decline.
If there are no ABSD, could we assume that foreigner buying interest in Singapore property will continue to increase even when local buying are retreating due to poor economic conditions and existing cooling measures?
there is definitely an increase in presence of foreigners in OCR condos in the past 2 yrs.. and these are not exactly the traditional high income tier foreigners or expats.
there is definitely an increase in presence of foreigners in OCR condos in the past 2 yrs.. and these are not exactly the traditional high income tier foreigners or expats.
thanks to our garmen...
However ccr luxury market is the worst hit
CCR is no so much a concern to the government. It appears again to me that If CCR gets hit hard because of the government trying to protect the mass market, so be it. After all, what is 10% to the super rich foreigners if they really need a place to part their funds.
CCR is no so much a concern to the government. It appears again to me that If CCR gets hit hard because of the government trying to protect the mass market, so be it. After all, what is 10% to the super rich foreigners if they really need a place to part their funds.
Casino - faster, better, nearer. ;)
But there are many coffeeshop talks that are raising a lot of concern and goes like this:
1997: some people are in the "game", so little CM even when red hot.
2010: some people missed the boat, so give you lots of CM even if they are not necessary yet (may not even be necessary).
The lack of transparency give people rumours to talk about or??? :beats-me-man:
CCR is no so much a concern to the government. It appears again to me that If CCR gets hit hard because of the government trying to protect the mass market, so be it. After all, what is 10% to the super rich foreigners if they really need a place to part their funds.
1. Yah right, didn't I say that before? Foreigners moving to OCR, particularly the China's Chinese? Otherwise how to explain OCR selling average $1350 psf? The easiest is to ban all foreigners from buying OCR properties or they can't buy anything below $1.5m! They have free choice anywhere else, still Ok right? (rather than also kill the CCR when the price didn't move and transactions are already low enough. Shouldn't they just aim & directly root of the problem? It is just like If 1 area in house got termite they tear down the whole house to rebuild? :doh: ). :p
But anyway, while lamenting unfairness, I like it because I am waiting to buy more! :D
2. Consider the %age pie? To be fair, you also need to consider the number of foreigners as well, as we know, there is big surge in 2011 from 2007! PRs are also considered as foreigners right (legally in terms of voting rights)?
3. Compare 2011 to 2009? Not fair without comparing 2007 to 2005. I can tell you 2007 is much much worst! :p
4. How about you ask about commercial, industrial and office properties that they cause the huge ultra-inflation? :scared-2:
I am not sure how you would propose to have a CM that is targeted at OCR.
a) Will it be fair to the people living in OCR as I expect their property value to drop?
b) Will such cooling measure drives more demand toward RCR which will ultimately have effect on the price of OCR as local investors cash out and reinvest in cheaper OCR property.
If a rise in foreigners buying during unfavorable economic situation such as in 2011 could translate to increase in foreigner population in Singapore, can a decrease in citizen purchase translate to an decrease in citizen population as well?
2007 is worst in terms of what?
Dont have anymore CM!!!! REmove all the CMs.....
Just price BTo and EC reasonably.... build 10,000 EC per year....
Then let the 20% population invest in condos in anyway they want...
All happy............
Dont have anymore CM!!!! REmove all the CMs.....
Just price BTo and EC reasonably.... build 10,000 EC per year....
Then let the 20% population invest in condos in anyway they want...
All happy............Totally agreed... slow down the sale of land parcel to control the private sector. Sell 5rm BTO @ $200k. 1st timers who meet income ceiling will never want to buy PC le... just leave the remaining 20% of private housing to be on autopilot. Govt is currently using 20% of market to control whole market. It'll be much more effective to use the 80% instead to control the market. Even a kid knows that! :cheers1:
However, the problem remains about the profit margin of each BTO project that the govt is willing to take... :rolleyes:
Dont have anymore CM!!!! REmove all the CMs.....
Just price BTo and EC reasonably.... build 10,000 EC per year....
Then let the 20% population invest in condos in anyway they want...
All happy............
Unfortunately, economic does not works this way. If BTO and EC flats were to prices very low, mass market PC will be affected. It will then create a demand for mass market PC and the cycle goes on and on and on........
If economic is so easy to understand, there is no need for government intervention. Remember the father of Economic; Adam Smith and the Invisible Hand's Theory?
Totally agreed... slow down the sale of land parcel to control the private sector. Sell 5rm BTO @ $200k. 1st timers who meet income ceiling will never want to buy PC le... just leave the remaining 20% of private housing to be on autopilot. Govt is currently using 20% of market to control whole market. It'll be much more effective to use the 80% instead to control the market. Even a kid knows that! :cheers1:
However, the problem remains about the profit margin of each BTO project that the govt is willing to take... :rolleyes:
maybe look at other perspective...who earning big buck from playing this game?:o guess loh...
Unfortunately, economic does not works this way. If BTO and EC flats were to prices very low, mass market PC will be affected. It will then create a demand for mass market PC and the cycle goes on and on and on........
If economic is so easy to understand, there is no need for government intervention. Remember the father of Economic; Adam Smith and the Invisible Hand's Theory?
Dont artificially price the BTO and EC very low...
I think 250+k for 5 rooms is quite reasonable.... Then EC about 600-700k for 3 bedrooms and keep rolling them out in enough quantity to make the young couples and upgraders happy....
Then if anyone want to buy condo, just warn them that its market pricing so be careful and then let them make own decisions...
Let that our market remains open to foreigners, we attract rich talents, singaporeans can upgrade to condo like "EC" and feel happy and those that really want condo then go buy condo...
That is so much better than to control 20% of the market....
Dont artificially price the BTO and EC very low...
I think 250+k for 5 rooms is quite reasonable.... Then EC about 600-700k for 3 bedrooms and keep rolling them out in enough quantity to make the young couples and upgraders happy....
Then if anyone want to buy condo, just warn them that its market pricing so be careful and then let them make own decisions...
Let that our market remains open to foreigners, we attract rich talents, singaporeans can upgrade to condo like "EC" and feel happy and those that really want condo then go buy condo...
That is so much better than to control 20% of the market....
Market forces will be at play again. Resale prices of EC and HDB flats will once again increase as PC prices increase. The cycle will goes on and on and on.... The Invisible Hand is in play.
Market forces will be at play again. Resale prices of EC and HDB flats will once again increase as PC prices increase. The cycle will goes on and on and on.... The Invisible Hand is in play.
yes thats true... but when govt releases more BTO and EC at reasonable prices that will keep a lid on the prices of Resale HDB and Resale EC....
yes thats true... but when govt releases more BTO and EC at reasonable prices that will keep a lid on the prices of Resale HDB and Resale EC....
forget to add that then more people will want to become citizen as well...
Why are we still talKing about this stupid ABCD...??? Move on already. !!!!!
Not happy just speak with your votes. If any leeway to change long ago they would have consulted the public before making it law.
Why are we still talKing about this stupid ABCD...??? Move on already. !!!!!
Not happy just speak with your votes. If any leeway to change long ago they would have consulted the public before making it law.
steady lah brudder..... good to air your views... maybe KBW reading our posts then change his mind? :)
Why are we still talKing about this stupid ABCD...??? Move on already. !!!!!
Not happy just speak with your votes. If any leeway to change long ago they would have consulted the public before making it law.Voting only in another 4 years...
Yes 'stupid' is the right adjective. As long as we're still affected, how to move on? How to act as if its not there? :cheers1:
I think one month more than enough to cry over the spoilt milk... (yes spoilt not spilt)
Time to move on to better investments of our time + $$$ man.... Bros.
steady lah brudder..... good to air your views... maybe KBW reading our posts then change his mind? :)
Like that a bit like fxxx a stranger woman on the street then next day get married to start to get to know her like that... :p
Dont artificially price the BTO and EC very low...
I think 250+k for 5 rooms is quite reasonable.... Then EC about 600-700k for 3 bedrooms and keep rolling them out in enough quantity to make the young couples and upgraders happy....
Then if anyone want to buy condo, just warn them that its market pricing so be careful and then let them make own decisions...
Let that our market remains open to foreigners, we attract rich talents, singaporeans can upgrade to condo like "EC" and feel happy and those that really want condo then go buy condo...
That is so much better than to control 20% of the market....
dont quite understand what you are saying. on one hand you say dont artificially price the BTO and EC while at the same time you want to set a price ceiling for HDB and EC instead of letting market forces dictate the price.
All these trouble so that a small group of property investors and speculators who already have a few roof above his head can continue to get richer at the expense of home buyer?
Now now? Didn't we say private property market should be left to market forces since it affects less than 20% of the population?
Why now you worry about the prices of the mass market PC? :doh:
History has shown that when the gov act clever by intervening in things that should be left to market forces, they usually over-do by acting too early! This is worse than letting the market forces run by itself! :banghead:
Unfortunately, economic does not works this way. If BTO and EC flats were to prices very low, mass market PC will be affected. It will then create a demand for mass market PC and the cycle goes on and on and on........
If economic is so easy to understand, there is no need for government intervention. Remember the father of Economic; Adam Smith and the Invisible Hand's Theory?
Oh my :doh:.
Don't you know it is the other way round? Mass market PC prices are so high are because of the massive upgraders making huge profits from HDB flats and chasing up the mass market PC prices? Is it any wonder that all those CMs just can't tame those mass market PCs prices?
Don't believe? Ask them to slam HDB flats with no renting out, must be for own stay, buy private properties must sell HDB flats AND then we see whether mass market PCs drop or not? I am sure they will definitely drop at least 20% once these are implemented! :tsk-tsk:
Market forces will be at play again. Resale prices of EC and HDB flats will once again increase as PC prices increase. The cycle will goes on and on and on.... The Invisible Hand is in play.
Let's make it clear: There is no such thing "let market forces dictate the price for HDB flats" because nobody can build HDB flats except Govt and govt control all the land available for building HDB flats (acquired under the National Development act at a cheap price significantly below market value)! Because of this historic reasons, they just have to control the HDB flat prices! Otherwise why should landlords like us let them acquire our land significantly below market value? :doh:
dont quite understand what you are saying. on one hand you say dont artificially price the BTO and EC while at the same time you want to set a price ceiling for HDB and EC instead of letting market forces dictate the price.
All these trouble so that a small group of property investors and speculators who already have a few roof above his head can continue to get richer at the expense of home buyer?
Now now? Didn't we say private property market should be left to market forces since it affects less than 20% of the population?
Why now you worry about the prices of the mass market PC? :doh:
History has shown that when the gov act clever by intervening in things that should be left to market forces, they usually over-do by acting too early! This is worse than letting the market forces run by itself! :banghead:
You are making it sound like private property and HDB are build in a total different country and what happen in one country will not have a direct impact on the other.
:doh:
Let's make it clear: There is no such thing "let market forces dictate the price for HDB flats" because nobody can build HDB flats except Govt and govt control all the land available for building HDB flats (acquired under the National Development act at a cheap price significantly below market value)! Because of this historic reasons, they just have to control the HDB flat prices! Otherwise why should landlords like us let them acquire our land significantly below market value? :doh:
Correct me if I am wrong. I have always thought new HDB prices are benchmark to the market price of resale flat? Is this pricing model not influence by market forces?
Market forces can work only when there are many suppliers, each can set their own prices. So private properties got many suppliers (they have their own land banks bought at market rate) and each set prices on their own - this can be market forces.
Govt land for building HDB flats much of them bought under National Development act, forcing landlords to sell them at significantly below market rate. As such, as a "national service" performed by landlords, the govt also must perform "national service" by ensuring that the HDB flats should be priced at close to construction + land costs, not resale prices. The number of resale units are also dictated by supply of new HDB flats + govt policies. Gov is the only supplier for HDB flats and only party seting prices. What "market force" you are talking about? :banghead:
Want to tame mass market private condos? Ask them to implement what I told you just now for HDB flats and see whether work or not? So simple also don't know? How to justify their millions salary? :doh:
Correct me if I am wrong. I have always thoughtnew HDB prices are benchmark to the market price of resale flat? Is this pricing model not influence by market forces?
Market forces can work only when there are many suppliers, each can set their own prices. So private properties got many suppliers (they have their own land banks bought at market rate) and each set prices on their own - this can be market forces.
Govt land for building HDB flats much of them bought under National Development act, forcing landlords to sell them at significantly below market rate. As such, as a "national service" performed by landlords, the govt also must perform "national service" by ensuring that the HDB flats should be priced at close to construction + land costs, not resale prices. The number of resale units are also dictated by supply of new HDB flats + govt policies. Gov is the only supplier for HDB flats and only party seting prices. What "market force" you are talking about? :banghead:
Want to tame mass market private condos? Ask them to implement what I told you just now for HDB flats and see whether work or not? So simple also don't know? How to justify their millions salary? :doh:
Do you agree that resale HDB prices and private property prices are interlink? Or do you believe that the movement of private property price will have no effect on resale HDB price and vice versa
Now come the biggest stupid thing of all: Why should gov care about private property prices? :banghead:
Their job is to take care of HDB flats' prices! They must ensure stability in prices, sufficiency in supply of HDB flats! They failed on both fronts, that is why resale HDB flats prices gone out of control! That is why HDB flats (DBSS) price gone out of control!
They can't even take care of the work on HDB flats they are supposed to do properly and they start mandling with private property prices which is the least of their priority? :scared-3: :doh:
Coffeeshop talk: some people missed the boat, red eye, keep lobbying for more CMs, wanting to board the boat again at cheap price? Anybody else heard same thing? :o
Do you agree that resale HDB prices and private property prices are interlink? Or do you believe that the movement of private property price will have no effect on resale HDB price and vice versa
Now come the biggest stupid thing of all: Why should gov care about private property prices? :banghead:
Their job is to take care of HDB flats' prices! They must ensure stability in prices, sufficiency in supply of HDB flats! They failed on both fronts, that is why resale HDB flats prices gone out of control! That is why HDB flats (DBSS) price gone out of control!
They can't even take care of the work on HDB flats they are supposed to do properly and they start mandling with private property prices which is the least of their priority? :scared-3: :doh:
Coffeeshop talk: some people missed the boat, red eye, keep lobbying for more CMs, wanting to board the boat again at cheap price? Anybody else heard same thing? :o
You are not even answering my question. Can price of resale HDB and private property move independently without affecting the other?
Why should we care? :beats-me-man:
We all know it is the job of the govt to take care of HDB flats prices. They should implement policies directly to rein in the DBSS and resale HDB flats prices.
Are you saying they are mandling with private property prices to rein in HDB flats prices? :doh:
You are not even answering my question. Can price of resale HDB and private property move independently without affecting the other?
Allthepies
13-01-12, 20:58
Aiya all Singapore property owners, the game is over, let's all move over to fry the stocks market instead! Let the whining singaporeans buy the worthless condos :D :D :D no more free property market
I won't even bother with the mickey-mouse Singapore stock market! So many cases of fraud etc and SGX can't even do anything to most of the perpetrators! :scared-1:
Even when no fraud and many cases of majority shareholders holding CEO and Chairman position and milking minority shareholders dry!
Dear all brothers and sisters here, before you money get locked in with all sort of similar capital controls, just shift them out of S$ and Singapore stock market and property market! Once and for all! :p
Aiya all Singapore property owners, the game is over, let's all move over to fry the stocks market instead! Let the whining singaporeans buy the worthless condos :D :D :D no more free property market
Why should we care? :beats-me-man:
We all know it is the job of the govt to take care of HDB flats prices. They should implement policies directly to rein in the DBSS and resale HDB flats prices.
Are you saying they are mandling with private property prices to rein in HDB flats prices? :doh:
You are still not answering my question.
Can price of resale HDB and private property move independently without affecting the other?
Allthepies
13-01-12, 21:08
I won't even bother with the mickey-mouse Singapore stock market! So many cases of fraud etc and SGX can't even do anything to most of the perpetrators! :scared-1:
Even when no fraud and many cases of majority shareholders holding CEO and Chairman position and milking minority shareholders dry!
Dear all brothers and sisters here, before you money get locked in with all sort of similar capital controls, just shift them out of S$ and Singapore stock market and property market! Once and for all! :p
Tat also a good suggestion... Let the government feel the wrath of the rich :D :D :D if we can shift a few billions out, then the government will really tremble
Dear all brothers and sisters here, before you money get locked in with all sort of similar capital controls, just shift them out of S$ and Singapore stock market and property market! Once and for all! :p
you have been actively telling us to shift out money out of S$, but you didnt tell us which particular currencies to buy.
All talk no action?
Tat also a good suggestion... Let the government feel the wrath of the rich :D :D :D if we can shift a few billions out, then the government will really tremble
where do you intend to park your money and why?
Allthepies
13-01-12, 21:20
where do you intend to park your money and why?
I'm proposing Singapore stock market but Teddy thinks otherwise. Why Singapore stock market instead of property market? Becos stock market is now much much more transparent, no sudden CMs, no politically influenced measures, very liquid :cheers1: :cheers1: :cheers1:
Keep our finger crossed that no whining citizens start to complain that the stock market is too high for them to buy and ask our softy government to help them :scared-3: :scared-3:
I'm proposing Singapore stock market but Teddy thinks otherwise. Why Singapore stock market instead of property market? Becos stock market is now much much more transparent, no sudden CMs, no politically influenced measures, very liquid :cheers1: :cheers1: :cheers1:
Keep our finger crossed that no whining citizens start to complain that the stock market is too high for them to buy and ask our softy government to help them :scared-3: :scared-3:
Teddy is suggesting putting our S$ into other currency but always fall short of telling us which currency.
Singapore stock is starting to look attractive, but I think this is still not a good time to to enter yet. i am expecting there will be a big correction in the coming months. perhaps end of Q2 will be a good time to pick up some bluechip
Didn't you know people also complaining? You know, the REITS! Ya, the REITS! Jacking up rents, and those retailers passing on costs to consumers! :simmering:
I'm proposing Singapore stock market but Teddy thinks otherwise. Why Singapore stock market instead of property market? Becos stock market is now much much more transparent, no sudden CMs, no politically influenced measures, very liquid :cheers1: :cheers1: :cheers1:
Keep our finger crossed that no whining citizens start to complain that the stock market is too high for them to buy and ask our softy government to help them :scared-3: :scared-3:
You are still not answering my question.
Can price of resale HDB and private property move independently without affecting the other?
What are you trying to drive at ? :confused:
Prices of prime properties have very little correlation with HDB. In 2007 CCR price jumped a lot, HDB hardly moved.
Prices of mass market properties are heavily dependent of HDB prices.
Isn't this another reason gov should "regulate" mass market condos ? To "ensure Singaporeans to afford a condo" if this is what the gov really wants ? Of course this idea is pure rhetoric.
But still, what's your point ? :confused:
the author's rice bowl has been affected.
my sense is absd was a preemptive move. when the real big boys come in, the won't just come in with a few million. the 3% feels more like a token sum which developers can easily absorb.
the author's rice bowl has been affected.
my sense is absd was a preemptive move. when the real big boys come in, the won't just come in with a few million. the 3% feels more like a token sum which developers can easily absorb.
Sounds logical...
For me, I am more inclined to think that it is pre=emptive not just for the bigs boys but also for the small ones as well... ie. the Singaporeans who beg, borrow and steal just to blindly plunge into the property market. These people cannot afford to lose the money if an economic crisis happens.
just price BTO and EC reasonably and build a lot....... and 80% of singaporeans will be happy..... the rest leave it alone.....
If foreign demand is high then condo prices stay high....
if foreign demand for condo is not high then prices will drop coz people will buy EC instead of condo...
As for those in CCR the super luxury type.... leave them to do what they want.....
tell me if this is simplistic and maybe too simple until our scholars think it wouldnt work so must use their complex algorthium to think of some CMs
What are you trying to drive at ? :confused:
Prices of prime properties have very little correlation with HDB. In 2007 CCR price jumped a lot, HDB hardly moved.
Prices of mass market properties are heavily dependent of HDB prices.
Isn't this another reason gov should "regulate" mass market condos ? To "ensure Singaporeans to afford a condo" if this is what the gov really wants ? Of course this idea is pure rhetoric.
But still, what's your point ? :confused:
1) Does CCR price have an impact on RCR price?
If no, why no? if yes, go on to answer question 2
2) Does RCR prices have an impact on OCR?
If no, why no? if yes, go on to answer question 3
3) Does OCR prices have an impact on HDB Resale?
If no, why no? if yes, then you get my point
just price BTO and EC reasonably and build a lot....... and 80% of singaporeans will be happy..... the rest leave it alone.....
If foreign demand is high then condo prices stay high....
if foreign demand for condo is not high then prices will drop coz people will buy EC instead of condo...
As for those in CCR the super luxury type.... leave them to do what they want.....
tell me if this is simplistic and maybe too simple until our scholars think it wouldnt work so must use their complex algorthium to think of some CMs
You suggestion is not just simplistic, it is also self centered, selfish and elitists.
I also have a suggestion too.
Why not construct an island like the palm in dubai and only allow foreigners to buy without ABSD ie. Singaporeans are not allowed to buy. That way, we will continue to bring in foreign funds while 80% of the Singaporeans will be happy with to live with the CM.
wow... i sense some personal comments here....
Why are my suggestions elitist?
Build more BTO and ECs so that majority of singapore can live in no frills quality HDB at reasonable prices...
If they wanna upgrade and have the money go ahead and buy condos...
Or else can upgrade to ECs.... they are still condos but with 10 years restrictions thats all....
Quality wise, I think they are comparable to all mass market condos...
Aft 10 years they will sure make money as the ECs are now condo status...
what is so elitist about my ideas?
wow... i sense some personal comments here....
Why are my suggestions elitist?
Build more BTO and ECs so that majority of singapore can live in no frills quality HDB at reasonable prices...
If they wanna upgrade and have the money go ahead and buy condos...
Or else can upgrade to ECs.... they are still condos but with 10 years restrictions thats all....
Quality wise, I think they are comparable to all mass market condos...
Aft 10 years they will sure make money as the ECs are now condo status...
what is so elitist about my ideas?
I think I said simplistic, self centered, selfish and elitist.
ultimately what you are trying to suggest is to ask government to give the HDB dwellers some candy so that they will be happy and vote for PAP. In return PAP will be happy to let market forces run its own course and withdraw the CMs.
That way, those people who have already got a head start in property investment will continue to get richer, live a luxurious and comfortable life while 80% of Singapore population are living happily ever after sucking their candy.
Have you ever ask yourself why and how Dubai real estate can collapse so quickly and drastically even without government intervention?
You are still not answering my question.
Can price of resale HDB and private property move independently without affecting the other?
won't the answer depends on whether supply and demand for resale HDB and private property independent of each other?
which leads to another question:
in an international scale,can the price of private property in Johor Bahru and Woodlands move independently without affecting the other?
Dont artificially price the BTO and EC very low...
I think 250+k for 5 rooms is quite reasonable.... Then EC about 600-700k for 3 bedrooms and keep rolling them out in enough quantity to make the young couples and upgraders happy....
Then if anyone want to buy condo, just warn them that its market pricing so be careful and then let them make own decisions...
Let that our market remains open to foreigners, we attract rich talents, singaporeans can upgrade to condo like "EC" and feel happy and those that really want condo then go buy condo...
That is so much better than to control 20% of the market....
Ya lor, like me lah, can't afford to buy pte condo 12 yrs ago, buy EC lor.
Why want to have CM5 to restrict inflow of foreign currency as well as restrict own citizens from having more than 2 ppty.:scared-3: I thought most countries are more concerned about too much of their currencies being flow out but now we are in the reverse way, scare too much foreign currencies coming into our country. :doh:
IMHO:-
Foreigners = 1 pte ppty (for investment or own stay)
PRs = 1 ppty for own stay only (resale HDB or pte ppty)
S'poreans = no restrictions afterall it is our own country, we should have the privilege, right, but should buy within your means, don't over-commit.:cheers4:
just price BTO and EC reasonably and build a lot....... and 80% of singaporeans will be happy..... the rest leave it alone.....
If foreign demand is high then condo prices stay high....
if foreign demand for condo is not high then prices will drop coz people will buy EC instead of condo...
As for those in CCR the super luxury type.... leave them to do what they want.....
tell me if this is simplistic and maybe too simple until our scholars think it wouldnt work so must use their complex algorthium to think of some CMs
Ya, if Singaporeans want to buy condo for own stay, EC is good enough but if they want to buy 2nd ppty for investment, then they will be eyeing on pte ppty. Oh, so if that's the case, is it that CM5 (if ppty prices drop) will indirectly helping this group of people and hit the other group of people, OMG.:doh:
won't the answer depends on whether supply and demand for resale HDB and private property independent of each other?
which leads to another question:
in an international scale,can the price of private property in Johor Bahru and Woodlands move independently without affecting the other?
HDB and private property are not like apple and orange, they are both of the same fruits just that one is more premium than the other.
When the premium orange get too expensive, some buyers will have no choice but to settle for the cheaper one, which will then create a supply shortage which will then push up the price.
So I am not sure why some forummers here keep selling us the idea that HDB and private property prices are mutually exclusive
Gcb/detached and luxury ccr condo are in their own class
50% drop in price still out of reach to the masses
If what you said were the true reason for CM5, then shouldn't we expect to see what they did for Casino? i.e. Citizens & PRs pay $100 entrance fee, foreigners waived.
So, to protect Citizens, they should slap 10% ABSD on purchase of any property by Citizens instead and waive the ABSD for foriegners! :p
Sounds logical...
For me, I am more inclined to think that it is pre=emptive not just for the bigs boys but also for the small ones as well... ie. the Singaporeans who beg, borrow and steal just to blindly plunge into the property market. These people cannot afford to lose the money if an economic crisis happens.
Pre-emptive move?
Isn't Bedok Residences selling at $1250-1500 psf absurb? :doh:
If they really want to protect citizens, they should slap 50% ABSD on the developer for selling any private property falling in HDB estates like Bedok Residences if they sell above $1000 psf! :p
This is to tell citizens not to buy so expensive! This is then called pre-emptive to protect citizens! :tongue3:
the author's rice bowl has been affected.
my sense is absd was a preemptive move. when the real big boys come in, the won't just come in with a few million. the 3% feels more like a token sum which developers can easily absorb.
Cm5 will significantly reduce foreign buying activity. Extra 3% imposed on citizens can be absorbed by the developer without marking up the price. However it is unfair to the resale market and the luxury segment
Gcb/detached and luxury ccr condo are in their own class
50% drop in price still out of reach to the masses
if there are only kings and slaves, then obviously slaves cant make the jump to kings.
but if there kings, dukes, barons, knights, freeman, slaves, etc, slaves can make the transition to freeman, knights to barons, dukes to kings.
There more intermediate classes there are between the top and bottom, the easier it is to make transitions.
similary there are so many classes of residential properties between HDB rental studio and the most luxurious condos, it is easier for one to affect the other.
question time:
is it that hard for an owner of 5room HDB to make the jump to a 3BR OCR condo?
but if there are only 2 classes of residential properties (no intermediates), 3 room HDB and The Marq class condos, is it easy for owner of 3 room HDB to jump to Marq class condos?
Think it is time to really reward citizens by distributing the huge reserves! Otherwise come GE2016 citizens should vote with their feet?
Wow! S$500b, take $300b out to distribute to 1.5m native citizens above 21 years old, each can get a few hundred thousand dollars! Wow! Singapore got no poor people! Everybody richer by a few hundred thousand dollars! :D
Cm5 will significantly reduce foreign buying activity. Extra 3% imposed on citizens can be absorbed by the developer without marking up the price. However it is unfair to the resale market and the luxury segment
Income gap is widening and it make it tougher to progress up the residential ladder. If you cannot afford a gcb in the past, you are very unlikely to be able to afford it in future
I heard coffeeshop talk that goes like this: Some people missed the boat this round, lobbying for lots and lots of CMs so that price will fall for them to board again cheap cheap! They got lots of money but no where to invest (they are not businessmen and not investment professionals). :scared-2:
just price BTO and EC reasonably and build a lot....... and 80% of singaporeans will be happy..... the rest leave it alone.....
If foreign demand is high then condo prices stay high....
if foreign demand for condo is not high then prices will drop coz people will buy EC instead of condo...
As for those in CCR the super luxury type.... leave them to do what they want.....
tell me if this is simplistic and maybe too simple until our scholars think it wouldnt work so must use their complex algorthium to think of some CMs
Not surprise. This could be the HDB owners who have been saving money and chasing after PCs.
Income gap is widening and it make it tougher to progress up the residential ladder. If you cannot afford a gcb in the past, you are very unlikely to be able to afford it in future
However with the rules being tweaked by the government, masses may have the opportunity to afford a luxury condo in future going forward
Income gap is widening and it make it tougher to progress up the residential ladder. If you cannot afford a gcb in the past, you are very unlikely to be able to afford it in future
that i very well agree. social stratification is setting in.
if you dont make it rich, it will even be harder to make it rich in future.
If parents want to play safe now, dont want to take risk (like Yowetan for example - move to HDB for peaceful sleep). Their children will have to take even bigger risk if they want to move up the social status.
Gcb/detached and luxury ccr condo are in their own class
50% drop in price still out of reach to the masses
There is not such thing as in their own class, they always overlap one another and join together like a chain.
They should make the GCBs affordable to 80% of citizens in Singapore based on your saying! :p
There is not such thing as in their own class, they always overlap one another and join together like a chain.
To be realistic, how many people really can afford PCs? How many people really can lobby for the CMs & will know the people who got the power to introduce CMs? :beats-me-man:
Not surprise. This could be the HDB owners who have been saving money and chasing after PCs.
They should make the GCBs affordable to 80% of citizens in Singapore based on your saying! :p
Grow up, this is a property forum.
To be realistic, how many people really can afford PCs? How many people really can lobby for the CMs & will know the people who got the power to introduce CMs? :beats-me-man:
latest cm5 is an intiative by the MAS
There is not such thing as in their own class, they always overlap one another and join together like a chain.
you are not open to differing views
a price drop of let say 20-30% for the GCBs and luxury condos above 5mil will have any impact on the resale HDB prices?
likewise an increase or decrease of the HDB resale prices will have any impact on the GCBs?
I think I said simplistic, self centered, selfish and elitist.
ultimately what you are trying to suggest is to ask government to give the HDB dwellers some candy so that they will be happy and vote for PAP. In return PAP will be happy to let market forces run its own course and withdraw the CMs.
That way, those people who have already got a head start in property investment will continue to get richer, live a luxurious and comfortable life while 80% of Singapore population are living happily ever after sucking their candy.
Have you ever ask yourself why and how Dubai real estate can collapse so quickly and drastically even without government intervention?
What you are asking for is for the gahmen to provide singaporeans with a immediate shot at buying a condo?
Condo is a luxury good in Singapore... Its a FACT coz 80% of SIN live in some form of public housing... should we ask for CM with our COE? so that we all can buy cars?
I work my way up from a 3 room flat to a condo owner over 20 years...
Base on your theory of a headstart, i should ask the gahmen to impose CM6 for bungalows and GCB......... 50% buyers and sellers stamp duties so that prices will plunge and I can have a shot at buying a GCB????? Coz those with a headstart can lead a comfortable live????
you mean EC not comfortable??? Or basically you as asking for a short cut to move up the ladder????
To be realistic, how many people really can afford PCs? How many people really can lobby for the CMs & will know the people who got the power to introduce CMs? :beats-me-man:
Please dont confuse voting with lobbying and making it sound like you are a victim of the lobbyist.
To be realistic, how many people really can afford PCs? How many people really can lobby for the CMs & will know the people who got the power to introduce CMs? :beats-me-man:
I agree..... Lets hypothetically assume that propert drop 50% like what Mr B said...
Will people dare to buy????? they willl be afraid coz their jobs will be on the line.... then when economy picks up again prices gone up and then miss the boat and then claim others have a head start????
What Jadey is asking for is for condo to be price cheaply so that 50% of singaporeans can afford one when the economy is doing well..... so condo prices dont go up in a rising economy and dont drop in a bad economy?
I can think of one country with such a system... North Korea...
Pre-emptive move?
Isn't Bedok Residences selling at $1250-1500 psf absurb? :doh:
If they really want to protect citizens, they should slap 50% ABSD on the developer for selling any private property falling in HDB estates like Bedok Residences if they sell above $1000 psf! :p
This is to tell citizens not to buy so expensive! This is then called pre-emptive to protect citizens! :tongue3:
Preemptive towards a tsunami of foreign direct investment. If our own people are the catalyst of runaway, then good luck to us...
Please dont confuse voting with lobbying and making it sound like you are a victim of the lobbyist.
Private properties owners especially those with more than one property and who have worked hard all their life, save and have been frugal with sound investment all their life are a victim of voices from Singaporean who wants to yi bu deng tian...... make the jump straight to private property market...
how many of us feel that the latest cm5 is the best solution to curb future potential high inflow of hot monies?
HDB and private property are not like apple and orange, they are both of the same fruits just that one is more premium than the other.
When the premium orange get too expensive, some buyers will have no choice but to settle for the cheaper one, which will then create a supply shortage which will then push up the price.
So I am not sure why some forummers here keep selling us the idea that HDB and private property prices are mutually exclusive
EXACTLY! There is no such a thing as separate markets for HDB owners, EC owners and private property owners in economic sense. These markets appear to exist because the government or we differentiate them. They are merely product differentiations in marketing sense. The pricing mix is related because they offer the same product except difference in values or perceived values differences. These different markets if so exist are related because buyers move from "one market to another" to derive satisfactions in economic sense.
The satisfaction of economic needs and wants especially for scare resources such as housing are very complex since mankind and till now, no economists have ever got it right in trying to satisfy the needs and wants of the human race. It is certainly not as simple as the laymen think. Even if government comes out with a workable policy, the economic wants and needs will eventually change as circumstances change and policies will need to refine.
EXACTLY! There is no such a thing as separate markets for HDB owners, EC owners and private property owners in economic sense. These markets appear to exist because the government or we differentiate them. They are merely product differentiations in marketing sense. The pricing mix is related because they offer the same product except difference in values or perceived values differences. These different markets if so exist are related because buyers move from "one market to another" to derive satisfactions in economic sense.
The satisfaction of economic needs and wants especially for scare resources such as housing are very complex since mankind and till now, no economists have ever got it right in trying to satisfy the needs and wants of the human race. It is certainly not as simple as the laymen think. Even if government comes out with a workable policy, the economic wants and needs will eventually change as circumstances change and policies will need to refine.
i would agree that HDB and pte condos and landed properties are related with the exception of GCBs/detached and luxury condos like ardmore park.
those are in their extreme end and therefore any prices changes in the bottom end will be very little or no impact on them.
It is similar to the recent ministerial package revision which is pegged to the top 1000 income earners. There is a big gap between the top 1000 income earners compared with the next level down the line and that is why majority of the citizens feel that their pay is still too high
What you are asking for is for the gahmen to provide singaporeans with a immediate shot at buying a condo?
Condo is a luxury good in Singapore... Its a FACT coz 80% of SIN live in some form of public housing... should we ask for CM with our COE? so that we all can buy cars?
I work my way up from a 3 room flat to a condo owner over 20 years...
Base on your theory of a headstart, i should ask the gahmen to impose CM6 for bungalows and GCB......... 50% buyers and sellers stamp duties so that prices will plunge and I can have a shot at buying a GCB????? Coz those with a headstart can lead a comfortable live????
you mean EC not comfortable??? Or basically you as asking for a short cut to move up the ladder????
After so many months of discussion, I am really surprise that so many so called property investors here still doesnt quite understand what is the underlying reason for the CMs. Many are still thinking that it is politically driven by last year election and now the rich are being victimized by the poor. And someone went as far as saying someone is lobbying the government for those CMs so that those who missed the boat can catch up.
oh. did China and HK introduce their own CMs because the ruling parties are politically threaten? Did someone in China and HK LOBBY the government so that everyone can own a PC?
If there is any truth to what you are preaching about government wanting everyone to own a PC, then why is KBW so dumb to continue with aggressive BTO and HDB building program? Why not just convert all vacant HDB land to build private condo and EC and crash the PC price?
If Singapore doesnt have 80% of people living in HDB, Singapore economy will collapse like a domino and so will be your investment, price of PC, CCR and GCB etc
how many of us feel that the latest cm5 is the best solution to curb future potential high inflow of hot monies?
They are doing it to appease the 80% of the singaporean population.... so that they will feel better, but whether ultimately they make the switch to private condo is another matter....
I feel its definitely a political move.... the problem is not private condo prices, but the lack of EC for first timers and hdb upgraders from far flung estates.... those in mature hdb estate can definitely afford to upgrade to condo as their HDB easily worth 600 to 800+k..
this problem cannot be solved...if you bring the prices of condo too close to HDB or EC prices then the masses will rush to buy condos and the prices will go up again...
That is why I say just build lots of HDB and EC... you provide an avenue for singaporeans to upgrade without being too riskly.....
i still dont understand why Jadey thinks EC is not comparable to private condo??? The only difference is 10 years and the ability to show off that you have "arrive" and hence staying in a private condo...
Private properties owners especially those with more than one property and who have worked hard all their life, save and have been frugal with sound investment all their life are a victim of voices from Singaporean who wants to yi bu deng tian...... make the jump straight to private property market...
problem with human being is that, they are never satisfied with what they have and they never will. that is the reason why we need CMs.
After so many months of discussion, I am really surprise that so many so called property investors here still doesnt quite understand what is the underlying reason for the CMs. Many are still thinking that it is politically driven by last year election and now the rich are being victimized by the poor. And someone went as far as saying someone is lobbying the government for those CMs so that those who missed the boat can catch up.
oh. did China and HK introduce their own CMs because the ruling parties are politically threaten? Did someone in China and HK LOBBY the government so that everyone can own a PC?
If there is any truth to what you are preaching about government wanting everyone to own a PC, then why is KBW so dumb to continue with aggressive BTO and HDB building program? Why not just convert all vacant HDB land to build private condo and EC and crash the PC price?
If Singapore doesnt have 80% of people living in HDB, Singapore economy will collapse like a domino and so will be your investment, price of PC, CCR and GCB etc
And your point is? Sorry I am simplistic.... can you elaborate more on the real reasons all the CMs are being introduced? I understand that for the first 4 CMs is to drive out speculators and protect singaporeans from rash investment decisions.... how about CM5?
They are doing it to appease the 80% of the singaporean population.... so that they will feel better, but whether ultimately they make the switch to private condo is another matter....
I feel its definitely a political move.... the problem is not private condo prices, but the lack of EC for first timers and hdb upgraders from far flung estates.... those in mature hdb estate can definitely afford to upgrade to condo as their HDB easily worth 600 to 800+k..
this problem cannot be solved...if you bring the prices of condo too close to HDB or EC prices then the masses will rush to buy condos and the prices will go up again...
That is why I say just build lots of HDB and EC... you provide an avenue for singaporeans to upgrade without being too riskly.....
i still dont understand why Jadey thinks EC is not comparable to private condo??? The only difference is 10 years and the ability to show off that you have "arrive" and hence staying in a private condo...
my view is that cm5 was imposed primarily to target the inflow of foreign monies into our real estate.
however i am one of them who feels that the measures have undesirable side effects and may not be the best solution to target the primary concern which is the foreign hot monies
i would agree that HDB and pte condos and landed properties are related with the exception of GCBs/detached and luxury condos like ardmore park.
those are in their extreme end and therefore any prices changes in the bottom end will be very little or no impact on them.
It is similar to the recent ministerial package revision which is pegged to the top 1000 income earners. There is a big gap between the top 1000 income earners compared with the next level down the line and that is why majority of the citizens feel that their pay is still too high
I happen to have a handful of friends living in GCB and apartments at ardmore. What I can tell you that none of my friends depends on property investment to make a living, nor are they too worried or surprise about the CM because they understand that our property boom is not sustainable.
People living in GCB are not that much different from other people living in OCR. They are just as highly leverage in their investment too, but at a much bigger quantum of course.
problem with human being is that, they are never satisfied with what they have and they never will. that is the reason why we need CMs.
we are not arguing whether we need CMs or not. In fact i am sure most if not all of us agree that we need government measures in place to prevent overspeculation.
However my question to you is whether you think the latest cm5 is the best solution to curb hot monies? I agree we need measure to curb foreign monies but i do not think the measure is the best solution
I happen to have a handful of friends living in GCB and apartments at ardmore. What I can tell you that none of my friends depends on property investment to make a living, nor are they too worried or surprise about the CM because they understand that our property boom is not sustainable.
People living in GCB are not that much different from other people living in OCR. They are just as highly leverage in their investment too, but at a much bigger quantum of course.
I want to be highly leverage and stay in GCB... but no banks want to lend me money.... so they are different from me...
I happen to have a handful of friends living in GCB and apartments at ardmore. What I can tell you that none of my friends depends on property investment to make a living, nor are they too worried or surprise about the CM because they understand that our property boom is not sustainable.
People living in GCB are not that much different from other people living in OCR. They are just as highly leverage in their investment too, but at a much bigger quantum of course.
you are digressing.
I did not say or suggest that those owners of the extreme end depend on property investment for a living
i do not understand your meaning of highly leverage. Do you mean that they took up more than 60% LTV for their GCBs and luxury condos?
i would agree that HDB and pte condos and landed properties are related with the exception of GCBs/detached and luxury condos like ardmore park.
those are in their extreme end and therefore any prices changes in the bottom end will be very little or no impact on them.
It is similar to the recent ministerial package revision which is pegged to the top 1000 income earners. There is a big gap between the top 1000 income earners compared with the next level down the line and that is why majority of the citizens feel that their pay is still too high
Let us take a step further and look at the private property market by itself. This market is itself very complex and there is clearly product differentiation and not so much a different markets in economic sense. Marketers like to call it a different markets but in economic sense, the so call different markets within the private property markets are in fact merely product differentiations in marketing sense. These so call owners move from one market to another to satisfy their economic needs and wants.
So from a macro economic point of view, property market by and large is a single market differentiated by different product mix to meet the needs and wants of different people. The 80%/20% (public/private) owners are merely market segmentation for the ease of marketing and management or product discrimination in marketing sense.
And your point is? Sorry I am simplistic.... can you elaborate more on the real reasons all the CMs are being introduced? I understand that for the first 4 CMs is to drive out speculators and protect singaporeans from rash investment decisions.... how about CM5?
It has become clear to governments around the world that global economy is entering a long phrase slow growth and the biggest fear is while economy is not growing, inflation remain high. aka stagflation. Which mean, our income is not rising, but the cost of living continue to rise.
When that happen, we will have social and economic breakdown and that will be a disaster for everyone.
Let us take a step further and look at the private property market by itself. This market is itself very complex and there is clearly product differentiation and not so much a different markets in economic sense. Marketers like to call it a different markets but in economic sense, the so call different markets within the private property markets are in fact merely product differentiations in marketing sense. These so call owners move from one market to another to satisfy their economic needs and wants.
So from a macro economic point of view, property market by and large is a single market differentiated by different product mix to meet the needs and wants of different people. The 80%/20% (public/private) owners are merely market segmentation for the ease of marketing and management or product discrimination in marketing sense.
i do not understand the point you are driving at.
So you agree that any price movements at the bottom end like resale HDB prices will have an significant impact on the top end GCBs?
you are digressing.
I did not say or suggest that those owners of the extreme end depend on property investment for a living
i do not understand your meaning of highly leverage. Do you mean that they took up more than 60% LTV for their GCBs and luxury condos?
rich people are rich because they are good at using other people's money to make money, and also because they can. Property is just one part of the portfolio and $20 to 30m leveraging for a GCB is nothing compare to their other investments.
rich people are rich because they are good at using other people's money to make money, and also because they can. Property is just one part of the portfolio and $20 to 30m leveraging for a GCB is nothing compare to their other investments.
again you are digressing further and further.
I am offering my differing views that GCB and luxury condo pricing are in their own class and i had already provided my reasons
It is very difficult to make any meaningful discussion if we keep digressing.
thank you and have a nice day
It has become clear to governments around the world that global economy is entering a long phrase slow growth and the biggest fear is while economy is not growing, inflation remain high. aka stagflation. Which mean, our income is not rising, but the cost of living continue to rise.
When that happen, we will have social and economic breakdown and that will be a disaster for everyone.
That's why CM5 is wrong.... They should curb hawker centre rental.... reits rental, Coe for commercial vehicles, remove Coe for taxis, reduce income tax, don't keep thinking or making money for all essential services....
again you are digressing further and further.
I am offering my differing views that GCB and luxury condo pricing are in their own class and i had already provided my reasons
what class is that? They are not affected by economic crisis, supply and demand, interest rate, cooling measures?
That's why CM5 is wrong.... They should curb hawker centre rental.... reits rental, Coe for commercial vehicles, remove Coe for taxis, reduce income tax, don't keep thinking or making money for all essential services....
IMO CM5 is the most effective and when property price starts to cool, people will start to get more prudent about their spending which subsequently will have a snow ball effect on the rest of the economy.
in the private sector, you can only price as high is someone is willing to pay for it.
Please refer to the coffeeshop talk I heard and mentioned here. :o
latest cm5 is an intiative by the MAS
what class is that? They are not affected by economic crisis, supply and demand, interest rate, cooling measures?
you have a tendency to digress away from our original discussion.
thank you and have a nice day
IMO CM5 is the most effective and when property price starts to cool, people will start to get more prudent about their spending which subsequently will have a snow ball effect on the rest of the economy.
in the private sector, you can only price as high is someone is willing to pay for it.
so you think cm5 is the best solution to address the foreign monies?
Please refer to the coffeeshop talk I heard and mentioned here. :o
u make it sound like cm5 is not primarily imposed to curb hot monies
Fully agreed man! They should stop the REITs from buying more than 3 properties otherwise slap them with 50% ABSD! They are monopolizing the market and jacking up rentals and then get passed on to consumers, hence the large inflation!
They should just break up JTC! Breakup all GLCs that are speculating in the commercial, office, and industrial spaces because of their monopolies causing high inflation! :simmering:
They should dissolve VICOM, a GLC which seems to be set up just to do car inspection when your cars are just 3 and 5 years old! The company was setup just to earn money from such inspection? Singapore's cars travel so short distance and need inspection when only 3 or 5 years old? :doh: Never heard other countries 100x bigger than us need inspection on cars that are 3 or 5 years and their mileage easily 3x-5x that of ours here per year!
That's why CM5 is wrong.... They should curb hawker centre rental.... reits rental, Coe for commercial vehicles, remove Coe for taxis, reduce income tax, don't keep thinking or making money for all essential services....
Originally Posted by Jadey
It has become clear to governments around the world that global economy is entering a long phrase slow growth and the biggest fear is while economy is not growing, inflation remain high. aka stagflation. Which mean, our income is not rising, but the cost of living continue to rise.
When that happen, we will have social and economic breakdown and that will be a disaster for everyone.
Those coffeeshop talk seems to suggest so. :(
u make it sound like cm5 is not primarily imposed to curb hot monies
I do agree that we should not privatise basic needs like our MRT
Those coffeeshop talk seems to suggest so. :(
I agree that the side effects are undesirable and fine tuning of CM5 is needed
You are probably from Gen x. The new generation wants to eat instant noodle: fast and easy! :doh:
Private properties owners especially those with more than one property and who have worked hard all their life, save and have been frugal with sound investment all their life are a victim of voices from Singaporean who wants to yi bu deng tian...... make the jump straight to private property market...
Without CMs, we will be like Hong Kong where properties have gone up by 70% since 2009. :eek:
And your point is? Sorry I am simplistic.... can you elaborate more on the real reasons all the CMs are being introduced? I understand that for the first 4 CMs is to drive out speculators and protect singaporeans from rash investment decisions.... how about CM5?
i do not understand the point you are driving at.
So you agree that any price movements at the bottom end like resale HDB prices will have an significant impact on the top end GCBs?
Nope! price movement at the bottom end of the property market will have an immediate impact on the mass market.
Price movement in mass market will have a impact on mid-end and so on. The high can be more price elastic but over time, the gap between the high end and mid becomes closer, they will impact each other. In economic sense, there is a price elasticity for each market segment.
Our so call very high end market has never been so high until Singapore starts to attract international investors with the IRs. Developers are quick and smart to differentiate their products and price them very very high to differentiate from the the normal high end. GCB is one of them due to the very scare in numbers. The gap right now maybe very large compare with normal high end and mid end due to price elasticity. Over time, price gap may become closer and will impact each segment.
From a macro economic perspective, policies meant to tame certain market segments will over time impact other segments because things will reach an equivalent. This is call the Adam Smith's invisible hand at work
Nope! price movement at the bottom end of the property market will have an immediate impact on the mass market.
Price movement in mass market will have a impact on mid-end and so on. The high can be more price elastic but over time, the gap between the high end and mid becomes closer, they will impact each other. In economic sense, there is a price elasticity for each market segment.
Our so call very high end market has never been so high until Singapore starts to attract international investors with the IRs. Developers are quick and smart to differentiate their products and price them very very high to differentiate from the the normal high end. GCB is one of them due to the very scare in numbers. The gap right now maybe very large compare with normal high end and mid end due to price elasticity. Over time, price gap may become closer and will impact each segment.
From a macro economic perspective, policies meant to tame certain market segments will over time impact other segments because things will reach an equivalent. This is call the Adam Smith's invisible hand at work
i have mentioned earlier that HDB, pte property and landed pricing are related which more or less explained by your reasons. however, i am not convinced that GCBs are mutually inclusive. My take is that even for luxury condos like ardmore and Marq are on it's own class
perhaps u can explain why the price gap between GCBs and landed price quantum will narrow in future
Without CMs, we will be like Hong Kong where properties have gone up by 70% since 2009. :eek:
is it a general 70% increase across HK properties? There are also selectively few projects that have gained 70% or more since low of 2009 in SG
i have mentioned earlier that HDB, pte property and landed pricing are related which more or less explained by your reasons. however, i am not convinced that GCBs are mutually inclusive. My take is that even for luxury condos like ardmore and Marq are on it's own class
perhaps u can explain why the price gap between GCBs and landed price quantum will narrow in future
Economic is at works all the time. Take the prices of very high end and GCB and the prices of very high end (be it landed or non-landed) and high end and the prices of normal high end and mid end. Each gap between each segment is not very significant. Each segment will have an impact to the next segment.
GCB and landed are just different products serving the same purpose. They are differentiate among things by price which have an attached perceived values and thus the different in prices. There is no clear pattern why prices of GCB and landed differ. The attached perceived values of each type and scarcity determine their prices.
You are probably from Gen x. The new generation wants to eat instant noodle: fast and easy! :doh:
Yup you are right..... want car, nice office, condo in town the moment they graduate from University......... thats why must build more EC for this kind....
If you keep pandering to all their wants, can we fulfill,
It is not the only reason but among many reasons.
This is remiscent of the "96 cooling measures which persisted till '03. It was considered drastic at that time.
When LHL announced it amid a rising property market, the news was generally deriled by property punters as over-intervention of free market by government whilst the majority of Singaporeans welcomed the move as a long awaited prick on the property bubble.
Funny how history is repeating itself. The situation now is not unlike '96.
Of course we all know how that turned out... the exuberance on the property market did not wane until the '97 financial crisis. After which it fell off a cliff. Some are still licking their wounds until recently. Many didn't have the financial muscle to lick wounds and have gone under.
Post '97 nobody thought the CM was draconian and perhaps maybe even prevented more financial casualties. However, some even lamented that the measures should have been implemented earlier to prevent the bubble from even developing. So like that how?... government can't win lah...
My lesson learnt was this... when the government gives hints on what's ahead (which they have on repeated CMs).... my philosophy is to just "diam diam" and read between the lines from the very first CM to guess the government's intentions
Gahmen say don't buy but people still "ngei ngei" want to buy then the authorities will definitely step-up the measures. Unfortunately, we can complain all we want but if Singapore is the playground that we want to play in we have to play by its rules.
Our goal is to make money right? and there are so many ways... why take the hard road fraught with obstacles. In time to come the obstacles will be removed and free to travel again, just be ready when it does.
If what you said were the true reason for CM5, then shouldn't we expect to see what they did for Casino? i.e. Citizens & PRs pay $100 entrance fee, foreigners waived.
So, to protect Citizens, they should slap 10% ABSD on purchase of any property by Citizens instead and waive the ABSD for foriegners! :p
Garment can sure raise retirement age but many of them may not want to work till such old age. Strive hard when young and retire early. I believe many here are working towards that.
Yup you are right..... want car, nice office, condo in town the moment they graduate from University......... thats why must build more EC for this kind....
If you keep pandering to all their wants, can we fulfill,
Garment can sure raise retirement age but many of them may not want to work till such old age. Strive hard when young and retire early. I believe many here are working towards that.
only if you have the means then you have a choice of not wanting to work till such old age, otherwise it is not a matter of not wanting.
It is ok. We will shift our money out of S$ & Singapore. Let them cool as much as they want & we will let them see another 8 long years of slam in property market just like 1998-2006.
It is not the only reason but among many reasons.
This is remiscent of the "96 cooling measures which persisted till '03. It was considered drastic at that time.
When LHL announced it amid a rising property market, the news was generally deriled by property punters as over-intervention of free market by government whilst the majority of Singaporeans welcomed the move as a long awaited prick on the property bubble.
Funny how history is repeating itself. The situation now is not unlike '96.
Of course we all know how that turned out... the exuberance on the property market did not wane until the '97 financial crisis. After which it fell off a cliff. Some are still licking their wounds until recently. Many didn't have the financial muscle to lick wounds and have gone under.
Post '97 nobody thought the CM was draconian and perhaps maybe even prevented more financial casualties. However, some even lamented that the measures should have been implemented earlier to prevent the bubble from even developing. So like that how?... government can't win lah...
My lesson learnt was this... when the government gives hints on what's ahead (which they have on repeated CMs).... my philosophy is to just "diam diam" and read between the lines from the very first CM to guess the government's intentions
Gahmen say don't buy but people still "ngei ngei" want to buy then the authorities will definitely step-up the measures. Unfortunately, we can complain all we want but if Singapore is the playground that we want to play in we have to play by its rules.
Our goal is to make money right? and there are so many ways... why take the hard road fraught with obstacles. In time to come the obstacles will be removed and free to travel again, just be ready when it does.
Economic is at works all the time. Take the prices of very high end and GCB and the prices of very high end (be it landed or non-landed) and high end and the prices of normal high end and mid end. Each gap between each segment is not very significant. Each segment will have an impact to the next segment.
GCB and landed are just different products serving the same purpose. They are differentiate among things by price which have an attached perceived values and thus the different in prices. There is no clear pattern why prices of GCB and landed differ. The attached perceived values of each type and scarcity determine their prices.
GCB price quantum is alot higher than landed due to land size. so i do not see the gap closing in future
1) Does CCR price have an impact on RCR price?
If no, why no? if yes, go on to answer question 2
2) Does RCR prices have an impact on OCR?
If no, why no? if yes, go on to answer question 3
3) Does OCR prices have an impact on HDB Resale?
If no, why no? if yes, then you get my point
Let me try again : exactly what is your point ? What are you trying to argue here ? What is the purpose of CM5 ?
Is it " to reduce all private property prices such that HDB resale price can also come down ?" :confused:
Look this is a very simple question. Dun try to act smart. Just tell us what your main point is. We can discuss from there. CCR/Teddy/Rosy/etc made their stand very clear, can you do the same ?
GCB price quantum is alot higher than landed due to land size. so i do not see the gap closing in future
I did not say GCB and landed price gap will be closing in the future. They each have their attributes and scarcity (GCB) thus their perceived values are different; thus the price gap.
It is ok. We will shift our money out of S$ & Singapore. Let them cool as much as they want & we will let them see another 8 long years of slam in property market just like 1998-2006.
A slump in the property market does not bother the gahmen that much unless the banks are affected in a negative equity situation. This is made more unlikely due to the 60% LTV ruling. Something which was not there in '96 (a product of lessons learnt in '97)
The kind of money the gahmen prefers foreigners to pour in are those that can generate wealth for Singaporeans not from Singaporeans. The duties and taxes collected for these transactions the gahmen can well do without.
The number of Singaporeans that do profit from the escalating prices driven by foreign hot money are comparatively small. This is at the expense of pushing it to unreachable levels for most Singaporeans based on reasonable debt servicing ratios.
I am not saying the CMs are fair, I am saying it is not entirely unexpected given the way prices were shooting through the roof at each property launch setting records at every turn.
Let me try again : exactly what is your point ? What are you trying to argue here ? What is the purpose of CM5 ?
Is it " to reduce all private property prices such that HDB resale price can also come down ?" :confused:
Look this is a very simple question. Dun try to act smart. Just tell us what your main point is. We can discuss from there. CCR/Teddy/Rosy/etc made their stand very clear, can you do the same ?
Don't anSwer my q with more q.
my view is that cm5 was imposed primarily to target the inflow of foreign monies into our real estate.
however i am one of them who feels that the measures have undesirable side effects and may not be the best solution to target the primary concern which is the foreign hot monies
My take is that the first 4 was to prevent a speculative take and create a bubble.
The last one was a hybrid of reasons from having to provide a baclance between HDB prices and Pvt. There is a take on effect for HDB and if the gap to too large, there will be many more runaway prices.
I feel ABSD is too blunt as a tool.... Too keep priavte condo prices in check build more EC to compete.... Whenever they launch a mass market private condo site, launch an EC site right beside it.... Sure control prices...
Refine ABSD so that it only target properties below 1.5m and below 1000 psf... Then less foreign competition from foreigners.... In mass market housing...
Foreign funds will then divert to luxury properties.... If world economy crashes... Foreign funds will pull out f luxury condos, no harm done to 90% of singaporeans....
And the gap will close and the chance form mass market condo dwellers to upgrade to orchard road condos....
My take is that the first 4 was to prevent a speculative take and create a bubble.
The last one was a hybrid of reasons from having to provide a baclance between HDB prices and Pvt. There is a take on effect for HDB and if the gap to too large, there will be many more runaway prices.Why do u say the last one is a balance between HDB prices and pte? Its actually not affecting HDB and minimal impact on OCR but a larger on RCR and CCR. :confused:
I feel ABSD is too blunt as a tool.... Too keep priavte condo prices in check build more EC to compete.... Whenever they launch a mass market private condo site, launch an EC site right beside it.... Sure control prices...
Refine ABSD so that it only target properties below 1.5m and below 1000 psf... Then less foreign competition from foreigners.... In mass market housing...
Foreign funds will then divert to luxury properties.... If world economy crashes... Foreign funds will pull out f luxury condos, no harm done to 90% of singaporeans....
And the gap will close and the chance form mass market condo dwellers to upgrade to orchard road condos....Govt already building so many BTO everywhere, not just ECs to fight competition with PCs. Lol! :D
Your recommendation to impose ABSD on property based on its asking price is quite unique. People will just get around that by buying properties at $1 500 001. :rolleyes:
I feel ABSD is too blunt as a tool.... Too keep priavte condo prices in check build more EC to compete.... Whenever they launch a mass market private condo site, launch an EC site right beside it.... Sure control prices...
Refine ABSD so that it only target properties below 1.5m and below 1000 psf... Then less foreign competition from foreigners.... In mass market housing...
Foreign funds will then divert to luxury properties.... If world economy crashes... Foreign funds will pull out f luxury condos, no harm done to 90% of singaporeans....
And the gap will close and the chance form mass market condo dwellers to upgrade to orchard road condos....
Would that motivate developers to mark up their price for those <1000sqft unit just to avoid the ABSD? Why 1.5m and 1000sqft?
Would that motivate developers to mark up their price for those <1000sqft unit just to avoid the ABSD? Why 1.5m and 1000sqft?
Yes it does not make sense.
I would rather see a capital gain tax and lower ltv for foreigners
Don't anSwer my q with more q.
You are just rude.
You asked whether pte pties prices are independent from HDB resale, I gave you evidence in 2007 CCR moved a lot but HDB didn't. You cannot rebut this fact, at the very least can you just say what you believe ?
Are you simply unable to formulate a clear statement ? What do you think CM5 is for ?
Yes it does not make sense.
I would rather see a capital gain tax and lower ltv for foreigners
This is fair in my opinion. Still allow foreigner to buy but they have to weigh against the SSD, CGT & ability to pay with more cash.
CM5 just slap them with 10% first. Scare people away liao.
This is fair in my opinion. Still allow foreigner to buy but they have to weigh against the SSD, CGT & ability to pay with more cash.
CM5 just slap them with 10% first. Scare people away liao.
imposing 10% absd is one of it's kind globally. It can be viewed very negatively by foreigners. whereas CGT is a well known tool to tame and reduce demand
This is fair in my opinion. Still allow foreigner to buy but they have to weigh against the SSD, CGT & ability to pay with more cash.
CM5 just slap them with 10% first. Scare people away liao.
You will be surprised that they still come back. Developer can mark up 10% and sell them at 10% discount just to make them feel shiok.
You will be surprised that they still come back. Developer can mark up 10% and sell them at 10% discount just to make them feel shiok.
however that will make a developer lose their reputation if the foreign buyer found out later that they actually paid 10% more than local buyers
penny wise pound foolish for those big developers if they were to do that. may only applicable to fly by night small time developers
You are just rude.
You asked whether pte pties prices are independent from HDB resale, I gave you evidence in 2007 CCR moved a lot but HDB didn't. You cannot rebut this fact, at the very least can you just say what you believe ?
Are you simply unable to formulate a clear statement ? What do you think CM5 is for ?
all I read is a bunch of lies and baseless assumption, not evidence or fact.
2007 HDB price didn't move? Here is HDB resale price index I got from HDB, where did you get your "FACTS" from?
2007 Q4 +5.7% http://www.hdb.gov.sg/icons/ecblank.gif;pv55d2e5c4866eb850
2007 Q3 +6.6% http://www.hdb.gov.sg/icons/ecblank.gif;pv55d2e5c4866eb850
2007 Q2 +3.0% http://www.hdb.gov.sg/icons/ecblank.gif;pv55d2e5c4866eb850
2007 Q1 +1.3%
however that will make a developer lose their reputation if the foreign buyer found out later that they actually paid 10% more than local buyers
penny wise pound foolish for those big developers if they were to do that. may only applicable to fly by night small time developers
They paid 7% more, not 10%. They don't necessarily just compare against what locals paid but also what value are they getting for the price they are paying.
When did we ever see a slump in property market without affecting the banks? May be you are right, a slump doesn't matter that is why we have so many CMs.
Ok ok, calling to all landlords to sell everything in Singapore (including properties in Singapore, Shares in Singapore, Bonds issued in Singapore) ha ha ha! Let's create a slump and see whether it matter or not? :beats-me-man:
A slump in the property market does not bother the gahmen that much unless the banks are affected in a negative equity situation. This is made more unlikely due to the 60% LTV ruling. Something which was not there in '96 (a product of lessons learnt in '97)
The kind of money the gahmen prefers foreigners to pour in are those that can generate wealth for Singaporeans not from Singaporeans. The duties and taxes collected for these transactions the gahmen can well do without.
The number of Singaporeans that do profit from the escalating prices driven by foreign hot money are comparatively small. This is at the expense of pushing it to unreachable levels for most Singaporeans based on reasonable debt servicing ratios.
I am not saying the CMs are fair, I am saying it is not entirely unexpected given the way prices were shooting through the roof at each property launch setting records at every turn.
What I heard in Coffeeshop talk: Last one for some people to buy CCR private condos and landed esp bungalows cheap cheap? :beats-me-man:
Why do u say the last one is a balance between HDB prices and pte? Its actually not affecting HDB and minimal impact on OCR but a larger on RCR and CCR. :confused:
Singapore's reputation will go down the drain as one that is out to con foreigners, as is in the past about taxi drivers over-charging foreigners! Few foreigners will come again, not to mention buy a property here! :doh:
You will be surprised that they still come back. Developer can mark up 10% and sell them at 10% discount just to make them feel shiok.
Would that motivate developers to mark up their price for those <1000sqft unit just to avoid the ABSD? Why 1.5m and 1000sqft?
Coz 1.5 m is in my view the max quantum for a typical upgraded Singaporean family to shell out... So we protect them from foreign competition...
1000 psf coz most mass market condo max is around this price.... So if developer choose to increase above 1000 psf, then they have to expect resistance level from some singaporeans coz it is beginning to get a bit expensive.... If 1000 psf is too low en we can always tweak it to 1200 psf....
So make it any properties below 1.5m and below 1200psf attract ABSD, anything above free for all.... So if developer want to mark up their mass market properties to avoid ABSD they will have to sell above 1200 psf and above 1.5m,.... But once they do that, it will be above the reach of most up graders... And their demand pool shrinks... So they better think trice...
Coz 1.5 m is in my view the max quantum for a typical upgraded Singaporean family to shell out... So we protect them from foreign competition...
1000 psf coz most mass market condo max is around this price.... So if developer choose to increase above 1000 psf, then they have to expect resistance level from some singaporeans coz it is beginning to get a bit expensive.... If 1000 psf is too low en we can always tweak it to 1200 psf....
So make it any properties below 1.5m and below 1200psf attract ABSD, anything above free for all.... So if developer want to mark up their mass market properties to avoid ABSD they will have to sell above 1200 psf and above 1.5m,.... But once they do that, it will be above the reach of most up graders... And their demand pool shrinks... So they better think trice...
1.5m provably was the threshold, it's probably $2m now...
When did we ever see a slump in property market without affecting the banks? May be you are right, a slump doesn't matter that is why we have so many CMs.
Ok ok, calling to all landlords to sell everything in Singapore (including properties in Singapore, Shares in Singapore, Bonds issued in Singapore) ha ha ha! Let's create a slump and see whether it matter or not? :beats-me-man:
I don't mean a slump doesn't matter, I mean at 60% LTV for 2nd property the bank exposure is very low. Properties need to fall 50% to get them worried.
Selling everything doesn't cause a slump either, bcoz a successful sale also means a succesful buy. And if people are buying how is that a slump? Btw, let's stick to properties for the discussion. Equities and bonds... etc are a different kettle of fish.
Also the CMs are not to cause a slump, it is to taper the rapid escalation of prices. What is going to cause a slump (if any) is the economic situation.
If the economic situation really deteoriates and property prices plunge, people are going to look back and wonder why in the first place a 99LH in OCR in HDB heartland can command above $1300+ psf. I would dare say without the CMs the property prices would be far higher.
2007 Q4 +5.7% http://www.hdb.gov.sg/icons/ecblank.gif;pv55d2e5c4866eb850
2007 Q3 +6.6% http://www.hdb.gov.sg/icons/ecblank.gif;pv55d2e5c4866eb850
2007 Q2 +3.0% http://www.hdb.gov.sg/icons/ecblank.gif;pv55d2e5c4866eb850
2007 Q1 +1.3%
And therefore your point is ???? CM5 is for what ??
1.5m provably was the threshold, it's probably $2m now...
Actually "targeted" measure by price quantum is not new. HK already doing that. LTV for 7mil HKD is 70%, below 10mil is 60%, above 10mil is 50%, foreigner additional 10% less. So mass market buyers for 7mil HKD and below can still afford their dream home reasonably easily. I personally find this arrangement better than ABSD.
Btw Teddy, howgozit does have a point. With low LTV now, banks are already protected. So no worry banks will fail. This measure is a signal that this gov is going left, plus, this gov does not want to encourage property as an investment vehicle anymore. However the market hardly develops as the gov wishes. In this case the gov knew it too. But the fringe benefit ("see we slam the foreigners to help singaporeans") is just too good to miss. LHL quoted this thing almost within a week to show PAP changed.
Private properties owners especially those with more than one property and who have worked hard all their life, save and have been frugal with sound investment all their life are a victim of voices from Singaporean who wants to yi bu deng tian...... make the jump straight to private property market...
I strongly agree!!!!:ashamed1: Why must insist on staying in pc when can't really afford. "Face" more important or financial more important? Singapore public housing is also very good, and the price is reasonable if buy direct from HDB. Why want to mess up the pc market leh?
They are doing it to appease the 80% of the singaporean population.... so that they will feel better, but whether ultimately they make the switch to private condo is another matter....
I feel its definitely a political move.... the problem is not private condo prices, but the lack of EC for first timers and hdb upgraders from far flung estates.... those in mature hdb estate can definitely afford to upgrade to condo as their HDB easily worth 600 to 800+k..
this problem cannot be solved...if you bring the prices of condo too close to HDB or EC prices then the masses will rush to buy condos and the prices will go up again...
That is why I say just build lots of HDB and EC... you provide an avenue for singaporeans to upgrade without being too riskly.....
i still dont understand why Jadey thinks EC is not comparable to private condo??? The only difference is 10 years and the ability to show off that you have "arrive" and hence staying in a private condo...
Ask me leh, I stay in EC, I'm not ashamed to tell people that I stay in EC, in fact I should be proud of it as I still can afford the EC, haha. Never stay in pc before so don't know how the life is like, but EC have all the facilities like swimming pool, gym, sauna room, reading room, game room, function hall, tennis court, guard house, BBQ pits etc. Every time, when you have visitors, they will call your home to confirm it, maintenance fee+sinking fund+GST is about $700+ quarterly. So is there any difference from the pc, and I think the only difference as mention above is the time frame but if you buy for own stay, how many years also no difference leh, time passes very fast, without thinking, I have been staying here for more than 10 yrs already.
Actually "targeted" measure by price quantum is not new. HK already doing that. LTV for 7mil HKD is 70%, below 10mil is 60%, above 10mil is 50%, foreigner additional 10% less. So mass market buyers for 7mil HKD and below can still afford their dream home reasonably easily. I personally find this arrangement better than ABSD.
Btw Teddy, howgozit does have a point. With low LTV now, banks are already protected. So no worry banks will fail. This measure is a signal that this gov is going left, plus, this gov does not want to encourage property as an investment vehicle anymore. However the market hardly develops as the gov wishes. In this case the gov knew it too. But the fringe benefit ("see we slam the foreigners to help singaporeans") is just too good to miss. LHL quoted this thing almost within a week to show PAP changed.
It could be more gradual but controlling LTV may not be enough to stem the tide of money coming in.
But I agree that the new generation is expecting to live in a PC almost immediately after settling down, which at times is unrealistic.
It could be more gradual but controlling LTV may not be enough to stem the tide of money coming in.
But I agree that the new generation is expecting to live in a PC almost immediately after settling down, which at times is unrealistic.
Do education and upbringing play a part in moulding the new generation mindset?
And therefore your point is ???? CM5 is for what ??
To point out what you said earlier about HDB resale prices are not moving up in 2007 is nonsense.
1.5m provably was the threshold, it's probably $2m now...
Sure $2m is the threshold? According to Gerard Ee, only around 1.4k citizens earn > $1.1m yearly leh. V much fewer than what I expected..
By extrapolation, how much can the typical SG upgraded family earn monthly? I think $15k to $20k only? Not sure if 2m is really affordable for these families..... Probably $1.5m lah.....
Ask me leh, I stay in EC, I'm not ashamed to tell people that I stay in EC, in fact I should be proud of it as I still can afford the EC, haha. Never stay in pc before so don't know how the life is like, but EC have all the facilities like swimming pool, gym, sauna room, reading room, game room, function hall, tennis court, guard house, BBQ pits etc. Every time, when you have visitors, they will call your home to confirm it, maintenance fee+sinking fund+GST is about $700+ quarterly. So is there any difference from the pc, and I think the only difference as mention above is the time frame but if you buy for own stay, how many years also no difference leh, time passes very fast, without thinking, I have been staying here for more than 10 yrs already.
I can confirm no difference between EC and mass market condo.... Only difference is restrictions... All the facilities are the same...
Sure $2m is the threshold? According to Gerard Ee, only around 1.4k citizens earn > $1.1m yearly leh. V much fewer than what I expected..
By extrapolation, how much can the typical SG upgraded family earn monthly? I think $15k to $20k only? Not sure if 2m is really affordable for these families..... Probably $1.5m lah.....
20k is a lot of money... If a family can earn that much easily can afford 2m loan.... Only about 8 k monthly instalment... Still got 12k to spend
20k is a lot of money... If a family can earn that much easily can afford 2m loan.... Only about 8 k monthly instalment... Still got 12k to spend
and not forgetting also they have 2k CPF money to use every month so the cash outlay would be further reduced.
and to peterng's point, i think upbringing plays a part. some of the kids grew up expecting to having a swimming pool in its compound. public pool is not so acceptable. when in fact, nowadays, public pools are like water theme parks!
gone are the days you see little bits of particles drifting at the floor of the pool when you go swimming.
How many singaporeans have 20k household income a month? I think only the top 15%?
How many singaporeans have 20k household income a month? I think only the top 15%?
a lot of income are undeclared btw...and with investments, more than $20K household income is quite achievable for many Singaporeans.
a lot of income are undeclared btw...and with investments, more than $20K household income is quite achievable for many Singaporeans.
a lot of mass market properties get stuck somewhere around the $2m mark.
Don't count investment.... Just basic salary
Don't count investment.... Just basic salary
say 15% of the population, say there are 1m households. that means 150,000 households? that would be the size of the market you're looking at.
Ya I think in the last census, if I am not wrong, those with household income of 8k+ constitute only about 20% of the population.... Actually I thought that is impossible....
But if you think about it, it might be possible....
We think it's not possible coz we are mixing around with people around our income bracket so we don't see the masses of lower income
Coz 1.5 m is in my view the max quantum for a typical upgraded Singaporean family to shell out... So we protect them from foreign competition...
1000 psf coz most mass market condo max is around this price.... So if developer choose to increase above 1000 psf, then they have to expect resistance level from some singaporeans coz it is beginning to get a bit expensive.... If 1000 psf is too low en we can always tweak it to 1200 psf....
So make it any properties below 1.5m and below 1200psf attract ABSD, anything above free for all.... So if developer want to mark up their mass market properties to avoid ABSD they will have to sell above 1200 psf and above 1.5m,.... But once they do that, it will be above the reach of most up graders... And their demand pool shrinks... So they better think trice...
So jadey my view ok? Can you share why you think I am selfish and elitist? A you planning to buy a condo now but think it's too ex and above your budget so you hope market drop ?
Ya I think in the last census, if I am not wrong, those with household income of 8k+ constitute only about 20% of the population.... Actually I thought that is impossible....
But if you think about it, it might be possible....
We think it's not possible coz we are mixing around with people around our income bracket so we don't see the masses of lower income
after seeing people heading down to showrooms even after CM5. i'm convinced everything is possible. and until the day all the sideline money is all in the market, it is tough for the market to conjure up a meaningful correction.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.