View Full Version : The real FACTS about Landed property
There have been a lot of noise and pollution in this forum recently started by charlatans and people with ulterior motives so I thought now would be a good time to lay out all the facts for forumers here to digest and draw their own conclusion.
1. CRASH of 1997
Some folks keep harping about the big crash of 1997 and keep repeating charts about how drastic the fall was for the landed segment but what actually happened? Were landed owners really affected when the price crashed. Just showing the price effect is only revealing one side of the story and in fact demonstrates how shallow and inept some people are as far as research goes.
Facts:
Total no. of landed transactions in 1997 = 2,315
Total stock of landed properties as at 1997 = 63,231
% of owners who actually had to sell off during the crash = 3.7%
This demonstrates the holding power of landed owners during the crash of 1997. SLIGHTLY MORE THAN 96% of landed owners did not need to sell off their landed properties at distress prices during the crash of 1997. Some people like to use the phrase that you cannot never enjoy your paper profit unless you sell. Conversely, you will never suffer a loss unless you are forced to dispose of your property.
Some folks will then try to come up with a silly postulation that the holding power was much greater in 1997 than now. Back then, the LTV was capped at 80% in 1996. Right now, the measures can cap you from 50% to as low as 20% if you buy > 1 property. Plus interest rates are at a low and expected to stay that way. Are the banks less or more like to call on your loans now than in 1997?
2. INVESTMENT RETURNS ARE LOUSY FOR LANDED
Another baseless point that some people make is that the returns from landed are lousy and that the returns are inflated only because of rebuild or AA or that its only good for the luxury landed segment. Obviously some people have been hiding pertinent info from the readers here.
These are properties WITHOUT any A&A or rebuilt done.
District 4
8 Bukit Teresa Close (terrace), bought Aug 06 for 475psf, sold in Jul 07 for 757psf. Anualised returns - 66.2%
District 5
39 Faber Crescent (semi-D) - bought Jan 10 for 471psf, sold in Dec 10 for 765psf, annualised returns - 64%
331N Pasir Panjang Road (terrace) - bought May 07 for 509psf, sold in Aug 07 for 574psf, annualised returns - 58%
District 13
16M Lor Selangat(terrace) - bought May 07 for 459psf, sold in Aug 07 for 608psf, annualised returns - 213%
District 14
115B Jln Kembangan (terrace) - bought Jun 09 for 474psf, sold in Mar 10 for 601psf, annualised returns - 34%
District 16
7C bedok rise (semi-d) - bought in Nov 06 for 210psf, sold in Oct 10 for 285psf, annualised returns - 41.7%
This is enough to digest for now and shall be continued in another post.
3. Maintenance cost for landed vs condo/apts.
This has been discussed to no end and there has yet to be any empirical evidence or study to support either side so I will not comment further on which is more costly.
However, what has not been highlighted is the following:
Maintenance expenditure for landed is DISCRETIONARY whilst maintenance payments for condos and apts are MANDATORY.
What this means is that for landed, you can choose not to pay for repairs etc if you cannot afford it and put it off for later when cashflow permits however for condos and apts, you are subject to statutory law. The most pertinent being S.40(10)/(11) of Building Maintenance & Strata Mgt Act as reproduced below:
(10) Without prejudice to subsection (8) (http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=Id%3A%226dc6f47b-84d3-4761-88b2-21d0778d163c%22%20Status%3Ainforce;rec=0#pr40-ps8-.), a subsidiary proprietor who fails to pay any contribution or interest due and owing to a management corporation within 14 days from the date of service of any written demand referred to insubsection (9) (http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=Id%3A%2261a79c65-b791-4b6e-806a-3e22eea308a2%22%20Status%3Ainforce;rec=0#pr40-ps9-.) shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $10,000 and, in the case of a continuing offence, to a further fine not exceeding $100 for every day or part thereof during which the contribution or interest or both remain unpaid after conviction.
(11) The court before which a conviction for an offence under subsection (10) (http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=Id%3A%2250f53516-36a4-4d21-a959-a898396f4a4a%22%20Status%3Ainforce;rec=0#pr40-ps10-.) is had may, in addition to such fine, order the subsidiary proprietor to pay to the management corporation the amount of any contribution together with any interest thereon or any interest certified by the management corporation to be due from such person at the date of his conviction, and such amount shall be recovered according to any written law for the time being in force for the recovery of fines.
Note that the fine everyday is on top of any LATE PAYMENT interest that the MC may levy.
If you are desparate for cash, you wll also not be able to realise your proceeds form the sale of your condo/apt until you settle your mgt fees + interest. If you are really strapped for cash, you will have to beg, borrow or steal to cough up the cash for the fees + interest before you can even hope to get any money back from the sale of your condo/apt.
The facts never lies, only those who wrongly or anyhow interpret them often does.
Singapore GDP
1996 - 7.6%
1997 - 8.5%
1998 - (-2.1)%
1999 - 6.2%
If you want to prove landed property has got holding power, then perhaps you should look into 1998 and 1999 instead of 1997.
I am also surprise that after posting this chart for so many time, you didnt even realize that the bottoming was in 1999, not 1997.
Perhaps statistic is just not your cup of tea
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/787/propertyindex.jpg
2. INVESTMENT RETURNS ARE LOUSY FOR LANDED
Another baseless point that some people make is that the returns from landed are lousy and that the returns are inflated only because of rebuild or AA or that its only good for the luxury landed segment. Obviously some people have been hiding pertinent info from the readers here.
These are properties WITHOUT any A&A or rebuilt done.
District 4
8 Bukit Teresa Close (terrace), bought Aug 06 for 475psf, sold in Jul 07 for 757psf. Anualised returns - 66.2%
District 5
39 Faber Crescent (semi-D) - bought Jan 10 for 471psf, sold in Dec 10 for 765psf, annualised returns - 64%
331N Pasir Panjang Road (terrace) - bought May 07 for 509psf, sold in Aug 07 for 574psf, annualised returns - 58%
District 13
16M Lor Selangat(terrace) - bought May 07 for 459psf, sold in Aug 07 for 608psf, annualised returns - 213%
District 14
115B Jln Kembangan (terrace) - bought Jun 09 for 474psf, sold in Mar 10 for 601psf, annualised returns - 34%
District 16
7C bedok rise (semi-d) - bought in Nov 06 for 210psf, sold in Oct 10 for 285psf, annualised returns - 41.7%
This is enough to digest for now and shall be continued in another post.
I am not sure what is the point here actually, if you want to compare annualized profit during the peak of flipping era, try compare it with condo lah.
Anyway, a picture tells a better story, dont need to cherry pick information.
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/787/propertyindex.jpg
The facts never lies, only those who wrongly or anyhow interpret them often does.
Singapore GDP
1996 - 7.6%
1997 - 8.5%
1998 - (-2.1)%
1999 - 6.2%
If you want to prove landed property has got holding power, then perhaps you should look into 1998 and 1999 instead of 1997.
I am also surprise that after posting this chart for so many time, you didnt even realize that the bottoming was in 1999, not 1997.
Perhaps statistic is just not your cup of tea
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/787/propertyindex.jpg
way ahead of you lah...
1998
Total no. of transactions for landed = 3,481
Total stock of landed = 63,920
% of owners who actually had to sell off during 1998 = 5.4%
Even if you add up both 1997 and 1998 numbers, more than 90% of landed owners did not have to sell during the crisis.
Looks like research and in-depth analysis is definitely not your cup of tea.
way ahead of you lah...
1998
Total no. of transactions for landed = 3,481
Total stock of landed = 63,920
% of owners who actually had to sell off during 1998 = 5.4%
Even if you add up both 1997 and 1998 numbers, more than 90% of landed owners did not have to sell during the crisis.
Looks like research and in-depth analysis is definitely not your cup of tea.
I am sure you do have all those information after spending so much time working on it. But you intentionally hide it because the number doesnt look very promising.
So between 1997 + 1998 there was a 37% spike in transaction. What about 1999?
Also what are you trying to prove exactly? During a crisis, isnt that obvious that transaction volume will go down because there arent many buyers around? typical supply and demand principle. Perhaps you might want to look at the number of property advertisement during the crisis to measure how many owners are looking for buyers
And what about condo and HDB. how did they perform in terms of % of course. (Just in case you are too tempted to blow up a huge number for comparison)
I am not sure what is the point here actually, if you want to compare annualized profit during the peak of flipping era, try compare it with condo lah.
Anyway, a picture tells a better story, dont need to cherry pick information.
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/787/propertyindex.jpg
Looks like someone is always running to the refuge of one chart whenever his earlier statements has been successfully refuted.
I am still waiting for someone here to show how much their terrace house or semi-D has appreciated without any A&A and rebuilding over the years.
I am just using this chart to dispel all that myth and rubbish that are floating around here.
Time and time again you keep coming out misleading and pointless information to corrupt this forum However I am very glad that there arent many here who believe you actually.
I am sure you do have all those information after spending so much time working on it. But you intentionally hide it because the number doesnt look very promising.
So between 1997 + 1998 there was a 37% spike in transaction. What about 1999?
Also what are you trying to prove exactly? During a crisis, isnt that obvious that transaction volume will go down because there arent many buyers around? typical supply and demand principle. Perhaps you might want to look at the number of property advertisement during the crisis to measure how many owners are looking for buyers
And what about condo and HDB. how did they perform in terms of % of course. (Just in case you are too tempted to blow up a huge number for comparison)
And what are you trying to prove by posting a price index chart without any meaningful analysis of the underlying transactions?
Cycles come and go. In a crisis, its who is left standing that is important.
Since you want the ugly truth , here it comes :
For condos/apt:
1997 + 1998
No. of transactions = 19,922
Total stock of condos/apt = 98,042
% of condo/apt owners = 20% - easily double that of landed owners.
And what are you trying to prove by posting a price index chart without any meaningful analysis of the underlying transactions?
Cycles come and go. In a crisis, its who is left standing that is important.
Since you want the ugly truth , here it comes :
For condos/apt:
1997 + 1998
No. of transactions = 19,922
Total stock of condos/apt = 98,042
% of condo/apt owners = 20% - easily double that of landed owners.
Why did you not response to my other question about what meaningful things are you trying to prove with these numbers?
Is sales transaction volume up or down a good thing in property?
Go figure and tell me what you learn ok?? :D
Haha, Ringo.....Ringo.....You are the real troublemaker who likes to post misleading and false information in this forum. Nobody is going to believe in you anymore. You are too defensive and too stubborn like a tough nut to crack!
I am just using this chart to dispel all that myth and rubbish that are floating around here.
Time and time again you keep coming out misleading and pointless information to corrupt this forum However I am very glad that there arent many here who believe you actually.
Haha, Ringo.....Ringo.....You are the real troublemaker who likes to post misleading and false information in this forum. Nobody is going to believe in you anymore. You are too defensive and too stubborn like a tough nut to crack!
please focus your attention on what proper-T has written, not RINGO.
He has put in substantial effort, so please show appreciation.
Haha, Ringo.....Ringo.....I am critisizing you. Why are you so thick skin? Why do you keep posting the same chart and talk all kind of non-sense?
please focus your attention on what proper-T has written, not RINGO.
He has put in substantial effort, so please show appreciation.
bargain hunter
14-03-13, 15:13
landed property prices are at an all time high. will a higher cash deposit and ABSD sap the no. of transactions for landed like it has for CCR condos?
I am just using this chart to dispel all that myth and rubbish that are floating around here.
Time and time again you keep coming out misleading and pointless information to corrupt this forum However I am very glad that there arent many here who believe you actually.
Talk about being delusional...I really don't care whether people believe me or not. I just state facts.
However, its another thing when someone is in a state of denial about their own postings. Last time I checked, I think you are well ahead of me and right on top in the fairy tale writer ratings. In fact, you have been given the honour of being compared to the infamous Mr B. Should we create an award for you?
Below are your 'fan' reviews from OTHER forumers :
It has reached beyond the point of using common sense to rationalise with TS (Ringo33). I really question his/her motive of even starting the thread. Not to discuss the movement of landed in 2013, but to "complain".
As many kind souls have pointed out, landed is really free market play. If a new SC has enough moolah to plonk for a few GCBs, then so be it. There is no need to link that with one's daughter/son etc, that is so low IMHO.
Aiyo, Ringo... why are you so against landed property?
we all know that bro ringo is just talking down the landed market because he is looking to buy land...
airspace is overpriced while landspace has yet to fully catch up
seems like I'm not alone, the more we talk the more we vomit blood as the ears are shut. now he say we cannot assume that landed has run up steeply but keep telling ppl dont buy landed as it has risen more than anything else and it will crash hard.
what kind of contridiction is this...but he can go on and on and on....:o
anyway not going into this anymore...:)
he makes as much sense as his arguments that the 3rd IR will be in jurong
Haha, Ringo.....Ringo..... No point for you to post the chart and talk about 1997 rubbish again and again. Nobody here will want to read your rubbish anymore.
If I were you, I would disappear with your infamous user ID and start afresh with a new ID. Hopefully you will talk more sense with a new ID. :tongue3:
Reminds me of TWIST & TURN cum DIVERT ATTENTION EXPERT MR B.. :D
Why did you not response to my other question about what meaningful things are you trying to prove with this thread?
Is sales high or low transaction volume good thing in property?
Why did you not response to my other question about what meaningful things are you trying to prove with this thread?
Is sales high or low transaction volume good thing in property?
Because by asking that question, I don't even have to lift a finger to prove your ineptitude. You just did it on your own! Only someone who has not been through a property cycle and is ignorant will ask such a question.
In a down cycle, it is always better to have low transaction volume because there will be less comparables for people to whack down your price.
In an up cycle, you will want to have more to support your price.
Becasue by asking that question, I don't even have to lift a finger to prove your ineptitude. You just did it on your own! Only someone who has not been through a property cycle and is ignorant will ask such a question.
In a down cycle, it is always better to have low transaction volume because there will be less comparables for people to whack down your price.
In an up cycle, you will want to have more to support your price.
obviously you didnt pay attention in class, thats why you need to make up your own economic theory, which obviously is wrong.
The reason why there is a down cycle is because there is more sellers chasing after small pool of buyers, which explain lower transaction and sharp correction in price. This is not a good thing because no seller wants to sell as lower price.
During the up cycle, there are buyers and sellers, thats why transaction is high and price goes up.
told you statistic is not your forte liao
Again, please refer to this chart, see how detached housing fall from almost 200 to 100 points between 1997 and 1999, while condo fall from 155 to 100 points over the same period.
So by looking at the chart, you tell me which one is better?
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/787/propertyindex.jpg
obviously you didnt pay attention in class, thats why you need to make up your own economic theory, which obviously is wrong.
The reason why there is a down cycle is because there is more sellers chasing after small pool of buyers, which explain lower transaction and sharp correction in price. This is not a good thing because no seller wants to sell as lower price.
During the up cycle, there are buyers and sellers, thats why transaction is high and price goes up.
told you statistic is not your forte liao
Again, please refer to this chart, see how detached housing fall from almost 200 to 100 points between 1997 and 1999, while condo fall from 155 to 100 points over the same period.
So by looking at the chart, you tell me which one is better?
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/787/propertyindex.jpg
Haha, run back to your silly chart when you have nothing to answer. You have just shown that you don't even understand your own question. Therein lies the difference between a pratictioner and someone who just bangs on keyboard all day.
You question to me, I quote is :
Is sales high or low transaction volume good thing in property?
and not what is the cause of a down or upward swing in the cycle.
Its not my fault if you cannot articulate your questions properly.
If you are holding onto a property in a down cycle, would it be better if someone came to you with a list of comparables done in your area indicating super low prices and persuading you to sell at that price OR have someone with no comparables at all come knocking at your door.
Haha, run back to your silly chart when you have nothing to answer. You have just shown that you don't even understand your own question. Therein lies the difference between a pratictioner and someone who just bangs on keyboard all day.
You question to me, I quote is :
Is sales high or low transaction volume good thing in property?
and not what is the cause of a down or upward swing in the cycle.
Its not my fault if you cannot articulate your questions properly.
If you are holding onto a property in a down cycle, would it be better if someone came to you with a list of comparables done in your area indicating super low prices and persuading you to sell at that price OR have someone with no comparables at all come knocking at your door.
I am done with this thread. Good luck to your economic fairytale
I am done with this thread. Good luck to your economic fairytale
Wait... you forgot your Mr B honorary award.....
I just believe that for landed, buy it if you want to experience landed living but as an investment, the rental yield is not high enough to justify such a purchase. Any investment banking on capital appreciation is higher risk than norm
Rental yield super low lah! :p
Good only for own stay...... :beats-me-man:
There have been a lot of noise and pollution in this forum recently started by charlatans and people with ulterior motives so I thought now would be a good time to lay out all the facts for forumers here to digest and draw their own conclusion.
1. CRASH of 1997
Some folks keep harping about the big crash of 1997 and keep repeating charts about how drastic the fall was for the landed segment but what actually happened? Were landed owners really affected when the price crashed. Just showing the price effect is only revealing one side of the story and in fact demonstrates how shallow and inept some people are as far as research goes.
Facts:
Total no. of landed transactions in 1997 = 2,315
Total stock of landed properties as at 1997 = 63,231
% of owners who actually had to sell off during the crash = 3.7%
This demonstrates the holding power of landed owners during the crash of 1997. SLIGHTLY MORE THAN 96% of landed owners did not need to sell off their landed properties at distress prices during the crash of 1997. Some people like to use the phrase that you cannot never enjoy your paper profit unless you sell. Conversely, you will never suffer a loss unless you are forced to dispose of your property.
Some folks will then try to come up with a silly postulation that the holding power was much greater in 1997 than now. Back then, the LTV was capped at 80% in 1996. Right now, the measures can cap you from 50% to as low as 20% if you buy > 1 property. Plus interest rates are at a low and expected to stay that way. Are the banks less or more like to call on your loans now than in 1997?
2. INVESTMENT RETURNS ARE LOUSY FOR LANDED
Another baseless point that some people make is that the returns from landed are lousy and that the returns are inflated only because of rebuild or AA or that its only good for the luxury landed segment. Obviously some people have been hiding pertinent info from the readers here.
These are properties WITHOUT any A&A or rebuilt done.
District 4
8 Bukit Teresa Close (terrace), bought Aug 06 for 475psf, sold in Jul 07 for 757psf. Anualised returns - 66.2%
District 5
39 Faber Crescent (semi-D) - bought Jan 10 for 471psf, sold in Dec 10 for 765psf, annualised returns - 64%
331N Pasir Panjang Road (terrace) - bought May 07 for 509psf, sold in Aug 07 for 574psf, annualised returns - 58%
District 13
16M Lor Selangat(terrace) - bought May 07 for 459psf, sold in Aug 07 for 608psf, annualised returns - 213%
District 14
115B Jln Kembangan (terrace) - bought Jun 09 for 474psf, sold in Mar 10 for 601psf, annualised returns - 34%
District 16
7C bedok rise (semi-d) - bought in Nov 06 for 210psf, sold in Oct 10 for 285psf, annualised returns - 41.7%
This is enough to digest for now and shall be continued in another post.
Any landed, because size bigger than what you need it to be, property tax higher, electricity, water, etc usage much higher, maintenance needs over larger area, renovation & repairs over larger area, still have to have individual pest control, after pest control still useless if neighbour never do :doh:
Quality also poorer, more repairs needed, roof always leak (very very common cause of headache and super high repair costs for repairing roofs). This repair sure can't wait, otherwise everyday put pair everywhere to collect water. :doh:
Maintenance and repairs costs no economy of scale, so always being charged much higher than condos. Over all, if you look at it over a 10 years period, sure maintenance is much higher! :o
3. Maintenance cost for landed vs condo/apts.
This has been discussed to no end and there has yet to be any empirical evidence or study to support either side so I will not comment further on which is more costly.
However, what has not been highlighted is the following:
Maintenance expenditure for landed is DISCRETIONARY whilst maintenance payments for condos and apts are MANDATORY.
What this means is that for landed, you can choose not to pay for repairs etc if you cannot afford it and put it off for later when cashflow permits however for condos and apts, you are subject to statutory law. The most pertinent being S.40(10)/(11) of Building Maintenance & Strata Mgt Act as reproduced below:
Note that the fine everyday is on top of any LATE PAYMENT interest that the MC may levy.
If you are desparate for cash, you wll also not be able to realise your proceeds form the sale of your condo/apt until you settle your mgt fees + interest. If you are really strapped for cash, you will have to beg, borrow or steal to cough up the cash for the fees + interest before you can even hope to get any money back from the sale of your condo/apt.
Rental yield super low lah! :p
Good only for own stay...... :beats-me-man:
Yes, thanks. 25,000 new citizens per year looking for a home to stay may think the same as you.
Any landed, because size bigger than what you need it to be, property tax higher, electricity, water, etc usage much higher, maintenance needs over larger area, renovation & repairs over larger area, still have to have individual pest control, after pest control still useless if neighbour never do :doh:
Quality also poorer, more repairs needed, roof always leak (very very common cause of headache and super high repair costs for repairing roofs). This repair sure can't wait, otherwise everyday put pair everywhere to collect water. :doh:
Maintenance and repairs costs no economy of scale, so always being charged much higher than condos. Over all, if you look at it over a 10 years period, sure maintenance is much higher! :o
Unless you have historical evidence to prove that condo maintenance in general is more or less than landed, the debate will go on & on. Economies of scale argument does not hold true for small developments with a small number of large units and facilities.
The only fact which nobody can dispute is that landed maintenance is DISCRETIONARY and condo/apt maintenance is legally MANDATORY. Go ponder on the implications of this in a down market situation.
May be you want to provide evidence to prove what you say?
I have no evidence, but experience to say what I say about landed vs condo. What about you?
Unless you have historical evidence to prove that condo maintenance in general is more or less than landed, the debate will go on & on. Economies of scale argument does not hold true for small developments with a small number of large units and facilities.
The only fact which nobody can dispute is that landed maintenance is DISCRETIONARY and condo/apt maintenance is legally MANDATORY. Go ponder on the implications of this in a down market situation.
May be you want to provide evidence to prove what you say?
I have no evidence, but experience to say what I say about landed vs condo. What about you?
My evidence is in S.40(10)/(11) of Building Maintenance & Strata Mgt Act. It is an offence if you do not pay your maintenance fees for strata units.
(10) Without prejudice to subsection (8) (http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=Id%3A%226dc6f47b-84d3-4761-88b2-21d0778d163c%22%20Status%3Ainforce;rec=0#pr40-ps8-.), a subsidiary proprietor who fails to pay any contribution or interest due and owing to a management corporation within 14 days from the date of service of any written demand referred to insubsection (9) (http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=Id%3A%2261a79c65-b791-4b6e-806a-3e22eea308a2%22%20Status%3Ainforce;rec=0#pr40-ps9-.) shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $10,000 and, in the case of a continuing offence, to a further fine not exceeding $100 for every day or part thereof during which the contribution or interest or both remain unpaid after conviction.
(11) The court before which a conviction for an offence under subsection (10) (http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=Id%3A%2250f53516-36a4-4d21-a959-a898396f4a4a%22%20Status%3Ainforce;rec=0#pr40-ps10-.) is had may, in addition to such fine, order the subsidiary proprietor to pay to the management corporation the amount of any contribution together with any interest thereon or any interest certified by the management corporation to be due from such person at the date of his conviction, and such amount shall be recovered according to any written law for the time being in force for the recovery of fines.
Why are you so argumentative? Did I say condo maintenance is more than landed? All I said is that there is no evidence to prove it one way or the other. Just because you have had a bad experience in your landed doesn't mean it is representative of the entire landed market unless you can tell us all here that you have stayed in over 50% of all the landed properties in Singapore.
Some people might just have bad luck in choosing a bad landed or condo unit which requires more maintenance.
Condo mthly maintenance charge say 300.
For landed, u need only have major repair or painting every 5 years on average, same as condo maintenance cycle.
So, 5x12x300 = 18k. More than sufficient for repainting and repair for landed hse, which cost est 10k.
Conclusion seemed to be maintenance is cheaper for landed, some more is discretionary.
Logical?
Condo mthly maintenance charge say 300.
For landed, u need only have major repair or painting every 5 years on average, same as condo maintenance cycle.
So, 5x12x300 = 18k. More than sufficient for repainting and repair for landed hse, which cost est 10k.
Conclusion seemed to be maintenance is cheaper for landed, some more is discretionary.
Logical?
a logical person will never say that living in landed property is cheaper than condo because we all know that what most landed owners are pay in utility bills every month will be more than what most condo owners are paying for maintenance.
while we are at it, please do also remember that what condo dwellers are paying in maintenance is not just four walls and a door, they are paying for tangible benefits like having landscape kids play ground. swimming pool, jacuzzi, function room, gym, tennis court, security, BBQ pit, view etc.
And unless you have concrete statistics and fact to prove, if not please dont say that condo dwellers doesnt use their facilities.
Haha...a man of his word indeed....I am sure whatever he post is extremely trustworthy...
From 11 posts up....
I am done with this thread. Good luck to your economic fairytale
Now, in this same thread....
a logical person will never say that living in landed property is cheaper than condo because we all know that what most landed owners are pay in utility bills every month will be more than what most condo owners are paying for maintenance.
while we are at it, please do also remember that what condo dwellers are paying in maintenance is not just four walls and a door, they are paying for tangible benefits like having landscape kids play ground. swimming pool, jacuzzi, function room, gym, tennis court, security, BBQ pit, view etc.
And unless you have concrete statistics and fact to prove, if not please dont say that condo dwellers doesnt use their facilities.
chey, i thought got stories about "sightings" on old landed.
chey, i thought got stories about "sightings" on old landed.
Yah....got one spirit here who refuses to leave.....
Look at what you wrote below and it is obvious that you are saying that maintenance fees for condos is much more expensive compared to landed.
However, you are not foreright to clarify that for condo maintenance fees, people are paying also for usage of swimming pools, gym, children playground, car park, common areas greenery, BBQ pits, security guards improved security etc. What do you get for all the repairs and maintenance you pay for landed which is as much, if not more than condo? :p
My evidence is in S.40(10)/(11) of Building Maintenance & Strata Mgt Act. It is an offence if you do not pay your maintenance fees for strata units.
Why are you so argumentative? Did I say condo maintenance is more than landed? All I said is that there is no evidence to prove it one way or the other. Just because you have had a bad experience in your landed doesn't mean it is representative of the entire landed market unless you can tell us all here that you have stayed in over 50% of all the landed properties in Singapore.
Some people might just have bad luck in choosing a bad landed or condo unit which requires more maintenance.
3. Maintenance cost for landed vs condo/apts.
This has been discussed to no end and there has yet to be any empirical evidence or study to support either side so I will not comment further on which is more costly.
However, what has not been highlighted is the following:
Maintenance expenditure for landed is DISCRETIONARY whilst maintenance payments for condos and apts are MANDATORY.
What this means is that for landed, you can choose not to pay for repairs etc if you cannot afford it and put it off for later when cashflow permits however for condos and apts, you are subject to statutory law. The most pertinent being S.40(10)/(11) of Building Maintenance & Strata Mgt Act as reproduced below:
Note that the fine everyday is on top of any LATE PAYMENT interest that the MC may levy.
If you are desparate for cash, you wll also not be able to realise your proceeds form the sale of your condo/apt until you settle your mgt fees + interest. If you are really strapped for cash, you will have to beg, borrow or steal to cough up the cash for the fees + interest before you can even hope to get any money back from the sale of your condo/apt.
Look at what you wrote below and it is obvious that you are saying that maintenance fees for condos is much more expensive compared to landed.
However, you are not foreright to clarify that for condo maintenance fees, people are paying also for usage of swimming pools, gym, children playground, car park, common areas greenery, BBQ pits, security guards improved security etc. What do you get for all the repairs and maintenance you pay for landed which is as much, if not more than condo? :p
Huh? Do you know the difference between discretionary and mandatory? It doesn't mean one is more expensive than the other
Perhaps you didn't read my first statement properly
This has been discussed to no end and there has yet to be any empirical evidence or study to support either side so I will not comment further on which is more costly
What is the average built in size of a landed, 3000sqft? Please compare with the maintenance of a similar size condo... Don't think it's going to be $300, probably much much more...:2cents:
How to compare apple to orange?
Condo got swimming pool, gym, playground, greenery all around, tennis court, common facilities and big landscaping.
Landed 3000 sqft got what swimming pool, tennis court, ...??? :doh:
End up people still unable to provide concrete evidence and claim that landed overall maintenance and costs is cheaper than condos despite having nothing that condos have! :p
What is the average built in size of a landed, 3000sqft? Please compare with the maintenance of a similar size condo... Don't think it's going to be $300, probably much much more...:2cents:
landed owners here all sound damn broke man. earlier some say utility bill for landed home is lower than condo, and now someone is arguing that anything broke or leak in landed owner can choose not to repair. they call it "discretionary"
honestly, if you have to live like this, might as well sell the landed and live in HDB flat. Whats the point of clinging on to run down landed which you cant afford to repair. Ego perhaps?
landed owners here all sound damn broke man. earlier some say utility bill for landed home is lower than condo, and now someone is arguing that anything broke or leak in landed owner can choose not to repair. they call it "discretionary"
honestly, if you have to live like this, might as well sell the landed and live in HDB flat. Whats the point of clinging on to run down landed which you cant afford to repair. Ego perhaps?
Eh? This is the second time you are back here again. Can you really pay heed to someone who says one thing but does another?
I am done with this thread. Good luck to your economic fairytale
Readers here are intelligent enough to know the difference between discretionary and mandatory expenditure and the implications of it in a down market. No need to try so hard to get an emotional response by insulting landed owners that they are broke. It just shows that you have indeed scraped the bottom of the barrel as far as a logical rebuttal is concerned.
Putting aside all the arguments here, I would say if you have a FREEHOLD landed property , do not ever sell it (unless upgrading to another landed), if you want to maximise your capital gains. There will be hardly any new supply of freehold landed property while the demand will only keep increasing. For condos, there are still many old freehold developments that can go en-bloc. So in the very long run even a Sembawang freehold landed will give better capital gains than a Dist 10 freehold condo.
I do not have any freehold landed but I wished I had.
Exactly. I have told the stubborn Ringo fellow that many landed property owners are waiting to buy another landed property when if the price drops. Landed property owners can see the values of their houses and they know very clearly that these are their prized investment that they won't let go easily even during down time.
Putting aside all the arguments here, I would say if you have a FREEHOLD landed property , do not ever sell it (unless upgrading to another landed), if you want to maximise your capital gains. There will be hardly any new supply of freehold landed property while the demand will only keep increasing. For condos, there are still many old freehold developments that can go en-bloc. So in the very long run even a Sembawang freehold landed will give better capital gains than a Dist 10 freehold condo.
I do not have any freehold landed but I wished I had.
Purely base on my experiences.
Stayed for 12 yrs in 2 landed Terraces before staying in 2 condos for 11yrs.
My landeds were broken into twice. As for my condos, no security problems at all.
Many landed owners take security for granted. In fact twice the theft enter my house thru my neighbour's unit.
Not forgetting public transports usually do not ply within landed estates. School going children and grannies have to be vigilant if they need to walk to a bus stop or MRT stations.
Beside the spade of break-ins in Siglap not too long ago, this is another reminder.....
http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/three-colombians-charged-yunnan-crescent-burglary-20130314
So security was one of the reasons we move to high rise condo w guards.
Landed owners save some money under false sense of security.
This is a Real Fact.
can share how the burglar enter your house through your neighbour's house?
Purely base on my experiences.
Stayed for 12 yrs in 2 landed Terraces before staying in 2 condos for 11yrs.
My landeds were broken into twice. As for my condos, no security problems at all.
Many landed owners take security for granted. In fact twice the theft enter my house thru my neighbour's unit.
Not forgetting public transports usually do not ply within landed estates. School going children and grannies have to be vigilant if they need to walk to a bus stop or MRT stations.
Beside the spade of break-ins in Siglap not too long ago, this is another reminder.....
http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/three-colombians-charged-yunnan-crescent-burglary-20130314
So security was one of the reasons we move to high rise condo w guards.
Landed owners save some money under false sense of security.
This is a Real Fact.
Purely base on my experiences.
Stayed for 12 yrs in 2 landed Terraces before staying in 2 condos for 11yrs.
My landeds were broken into twice. As for my condos, no security problems at all.
Many landed owners take security for granted. In fact twice the theft enter my house thru my neighbour's unit.
Not forgetting public transports usually do not ply within landed estates. School going children and grannies have to be vigilant if they need to walk to a bus stop or MRT stations.
Beside the spade of break-ins in Siglap not too long ago, this is another reminder.....
http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/three-colombians-charged-yunnan-crescent-burglary-20130314
So security was one of the reasons we move to high rise condo w guards.
Landed owners save some money under false sense of security.
This is a Real Fact.
Do you still own any of the terraces?
Extract from a condo's resident's handbook...wow..scary.
4. All Maintenance Charges are payable on the 1st day of each quarter of a calendar year – January – March, April – June, July – September, October – December.
5. Late payment interest (rates to be determined by the Management) will be levied on Maintenance Charges not received after 30 days from the date of notice to pay.
6. Further legal action shall be taken should the Subsidiary Proprietor continue to default on Maintenance payment. The following action could be taken by the MCST to recover arrears :-
a. Lodge a charge against the said unit (SP will be prevented from selling the unit unless outstanding maintenance charges, with interest, are fully paid);
b. Application of garnishment order on the unit, if the Subsidiary Proprietor is collecting rental from the unit;
c. File legal claim at the Small Claims Tribunal;
d. Application to the courts to have the unit sold to recover all outstanding maintenance charges still owing
The above mentioned legal actions are enforceable under the BMSMA (2004)
If you stay in a landed house, most likely you will have a dog. In condo, very often pets are not allowed. The dog can help to guard your house.
In addition, it is advisable to install CCTV with alarm in your house since nowadays there are so many foreigners in Singapore.
Purely base on my experiences.
Stayed for 12 yrs in 2 landed Terraces before staying in 2 condos for 11yrs.
My landeds were broken into twice. As for my condos, no security problems at all.
Many landed owners take security for granted. In fact twice the theft enter my house thru my neighbour's unit.
Not forgetting public transports usually do not ply within landed estates. School going children and grannies have to be vigilant if they need to walk to a bus stop or MRT stations.
Beside the spade of break-ins in Siglap not too long ago, this is another reminder.....
http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/three-colombians-charged-yunnan-crescent-burglary-20130314
So security was one of the reasons we move to high rise condo w guards.
Landed owners save some money under false sense of security.
This is a Real Fact.
way ahead of you lah...
1998
Total no. of transactions for landed = 3,481
Total stock of landed = 63,920
% of owners who actually had to sell off during 1998 = 5.4%
Even if you add up both 1997 and 1998 numbers, more than 90% of landed owners did not have to sell during the crisis.
Looks like research and in-depth analysis is definitely not your cup of tea.
Let me complete the full picture. Many landed were bought in the 70's, 80's and early 90's. Even at the lowest point in 1999, the price index is still way higher than those in the 80's and early 90's. So, of course, everyone can hold wat...
So, if the index now drops to 200, it is a correction only. If it crashes to 10 which is 1975 price, see whether got people sell or not.
Therefore, it is incorrect to conclude that landed people got more holding power.
http://forums.condosingapore.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=5545&stc=1&d=1363334892
Let me complete the full picture. Many landed were bought in the 70's, 80's and early 90's. Even at the lowest point in 1999, the price index is still way higher than those in the 80's and early 90's. So, of course, everyone can hold wat...
So, if the index now drops to 200, it is a correction only. If it crashes to 10 which is 1975 price, see whether got people sell or not.
Therefore, it is incorrect to conclude that landed people got more holding power.
http://forums.condosingapore.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=5545&stc=1&d=1363334892
What you are saying somehow doesn't gel. Are you saying that there were no condo and apt transactions in the 70s, 80s and 90s? Unless you can show the readers here that the transactions were mainly just landed during that period, then your theory doesn't hold. If there have been roughly the same proportion of non landed vs landed transactions throughout the 70s, 80s and 90s, why is it that the percentage of transactions of condo/apts during the crash was more than double that in percentage terms of landed. To the non-landed owners, wouldn't they have 'equal' holding if they had bought in the 70s, 80s and 90s as well?
Since you want to show that chart again, another glaring inconsistency to your observation is that detached, terrace and to a lesser extent, semi-d house ran up the most from 1994 onwards.
What do you think caused the spurt? There must have been quite a significant no. of transactions to cause the price index for those segments to peak so much. For the people who bought during this period, what 'buffer' are you talking about? Don't you think that they will be ones that will suffer the most? Yet, I have shown that less than 10% of the total stock of landed owners had to sell during the crash of 1998/99.
In comparison, apt and condos went up the least, shouldn't they enjoy a bigger buffer since their prices didn't go up as much ? Yet, my figures have shown that the no. of condo/apt owners who had to sell off was more than double (in percentage terms mind you) of the landed owners.
If you stay in a landed house, most likely you will have a dog. In condo, very often pets are not allowed. The dog can help to guard your house.
In addition, it is advisable to install CCTV with alarm in your house since nowadays there are so many foreigners in Singapore.
pets not allowed in condos???
Once u stayed in spacious landed, u probably wont want to squeeze in condos. U can play hide and seek in a landed, but certainly not for condo unit, cos a 360 degree turn, u can see everything!
Just like once u own a private car, u probably wont want to squeeze in buses / mrt trains.
:D
The point about maintenance, what one pays for monthly maintenance in a condo is only for the external shared facilities, cleaning and security. These are mandatory whether or not there are damages, and whether or not the damages are critical. It does not cover your internal live-in area, which you still need to pay extra yourself.
Whereas for landed, indeed maintenance is discretionary mostly unless critical damages.
And the point about higher utilities bills, it is all about usage and not about the size although landed incurs more sanitary charges due to the number of bathrooms you have.
Property tax for landed (expressed as a % of the purchase price) is also lower than condo due to lower rental yield. :rolleyes:
Once u stayed in spacious landed, u probably wont want to squeeze in condos. U can play hide and seek in a landed, but certainly not for condo unit, cos a 360 degree turn, u can see everything!
Just like once u own a private car, u probably wont want to squeeze in buses / mrt trains.
:D
The point about maintenance, what one pays for monthly maintenance in a condo is only for the external shared facilities, cleaning and security. These are mandatory whether or not there are damages, and whether or not the damages are critical. It does not cover your internal live-in area, which you still need to pay extra yourself.
Whereas for landed, indeed maintenance is discretionary mostly unless critical damages.
And the point about higher utilities bills, it is all about usage and not about the size although landed incurs more sanitary charges due to the number of bathrooms you have.
Property tax for landed (expressed as a % of the purchase price) is also lower than condo due to lower rental yield. :rolleyes:
Please stop your nonsense about utilities bill lah. last time people challenge you to show your bill you went into hide and seek.
wayang sia.
Please stop your nonsense about utilities bill lah. last time people challenge you to show your bill you went into hide and seek.
wayang sia.
Dunno who play hide and seek when the bet is placed higher at $5K wor. So u still wan to bet boh? My new semi d less than $250 utility bill per month, aimai?
Dunno who play hide and seek when the bet is placed higher at $5K wor. So u still wan to bet boh? My new semi d less than $250 utility bill per month, aimai?
He won't lah. Afterwards lose, no money to pay his condo maintenance fees.
He won't lah. Afterwards lose, no money to pay his condo maintenance fees.
Tats true :D $5K can last him more than a year of maintenance fees.
BLUE, just wondering from SEP 2012 to this week you have not post anything on this forum and suddenly you felt the urge in doing so this week.
I just wondering have you been secretly and despicably posting using a different account??
Imagine someone who makes a declaration and then completely goes against it not once, not twice but four times!
I wonder how much faith you can place on remarks or comments made by that person.
I am done with this thread. Good luck to your economic fairytale
Once you have ever lived in bungalow in the sky, you will never want to live on a landed! :tongue3:
People who live in bungalow in the sky will not be bothered with that small additional maintenance fund costs.
It looks like people living in landed are very particular about saving those small maintenance costs, to the extend of delaying whatever repairs and maintenance they need to do? They are so cheapo / desperate / cheapskate? Now then I know! :doh:
Once u stayed in spacious landed, u probably wont want to squeeze in condos. U can play hide and seek in a landed, but certainly not for condo unit, cos a 360 degree turn, u can see everything!
Just like once u own a private car, u probably wont want to squeeze in buses / mrt trains.
:D
The point about maintenance, what one pays for monthly maintenance in a condo is only for the external shared facilities, cleaning and security. These are mandatory whether or not there are damages, and whether or not the damages are critical. It does not cover your internal live-in area, which you still need to pay extra yourself.
Whereas for landed, indeed maintenance is discretionary mostly unless critical damages.
And the point about higher utilities bills, it is all about usage and not about the size although landed incurs more sanitary charges due to the number of bathrooms you have.
Property tax for landed (expressed as a % of the purchase price) is also lower than condo due to lower rental yield. :rolleyes:
Thank you for continually posting so that the thread gets 'uped'. Before all you readers rush off to procure your bungalow in the sky, it gives me a chance to remind readers here the dangers of not paying your condo maintenance fees which is mandatory and an offence. No cond/apt owner can escape be it an MM unit or a 'bungalow in the sky'.
Extract from a typical condo resident's handbook
5. Late payment interest (rates to be determined by the Management) will be levied on Maintenance Charges not received after 30 days from the date of notice to pay.
6. Further legal action shall be taken should the Subsidiary Proprietor continue to default on Maintenance payment. The following action could be taken by the MCST to recover arrears :-
a. Lodge a charge against the said unit (SP will be prevented from selling the unit unless outstanding maintenance charges, with interest, are fully paid);
b. Application of garnishment order on the unit, if the Subsidiary Proprietor is collecting rental from the unit;
c. File legal claim at the Small Claims Tribunal;
d. Application to the courts to have the unit sold to recover all outstanding maintenance charges still owing
The above mentioned legal actions are enforceable under the BMSMA (2004)
Some condos do have restrictions on dogs, especially BIG dogs. Your neighbours may not like your dog's barking and may complain to the management. You should check out on the pet policy of your condos. If you have more than one dog, better stay in a landed house.
pets not allowed in condos???
.....
Since you want to show that chart again, another glaring inconsistency to your observation is that detached, terrace and to a lesser extent, semi-d house ran up the most from 1994 onwards.
What do you think caused the spurt? There must have been quite a significant no. of transactions to cause the price index for those segments to peak so much. For the people who bought during this period, what 'buffer' are you talking about? Don't you think that they will be ones that will suffer the most? Yet, I have shown that less than 10% of the total stock of landed owners had to sell during the crash of 1998/99.
In comparison, apt and condos went up the least, shouldn't they enjoy a bigger buffer since their prices didn't go up as much ? Yet, my figures have shown that the no. of condo/apt owners who had to sell off was more than double (in percentage terms mind you) of the landed owners.
Simple.. Cos landed mostly own stay. Condos a lot bought for investment. Those who bought landed or condos in the 80s etc, got it cheap. Do you have data to show that those condo owners who sold bought them in the 80s?
I dont have all the data, but your conclusion based on just comparing transaction percentage is wrong as you do not have the full data. It is naive to say the least.
Btw, how do you know those condo sellers in 1997 period were not landed owners who bought the condos for investments? So these landed owners got holding power or not? I cannot conclude without more data.
The ones with real holding power are those with fully paid properties and lots of idle cash, landed or otherwise.
Bottomline, if you lose your job and still owe the banks millions in mortgage loans, it does not matter whether you are a landed or condo owner. Especially in recent years, those who bought landed at ridiculous prices and borrow to the hilt, then I say, good luck to them and thank you.
So, even if I am a landed owner, I will look at my own circumstances rather than feel comforted by what proper-t has concluded about landed owners having more holding power.
From a value persprctive, landed cheong more during bull run, but drop more during bear run. It is not a fact but a historical observation.
Simple.. Cos landed mostly own stay. Condos a lot bought for investment. Those who bought landed or condos in the 80s etc, got it cheap. Do you have data to show that those condo owners who sold bought them in the 80s?
I dont have all the data, but your conclusion based on just comparing transaction percentage is wrong as you do not have the full data. It is naive to say the least.
Btw, how do you know those condo sellers in 1997 period were not landed owners who bought the condos for investments? So these landed owners got holding power or not? I cannot conclude without more data.
If you do not have the data then how can you say I am wrong? You are just making assumptions yourself but what is worse is that you do not even have any hard figures to show or validate your position. So far, all I have heard from you is conjecture. My conclusion could very well be correct but that is something you cannot prove otherwise.
I am stating what the statistics show which is during the crash, the percentage of condo owners that sold off at the distress prices was more than double that the percentage of landed owners and the indications from these figures are that landed owners probably weathered the crash better. Whether readers believe in what I am laying out here, I leave it to them to decide but for you to say that my conclusion is wrong is totally unjustified and I think you should retract your statement unless you have hard figures to prove me wrong.
From a value persprctive, landed cheong more during bull run, but drop more during bear run. It is not a fact but a historical observation.
During the 1979 to 1986 cycle and the 2006 to 2009 cycle, which segment cheong more and dropped more? Shouldn't those periods also form part of your total historical observation. Your statement therefore is inaccurate as it is not always landed that cheong more during upswings and drop most during the down part of the cycle.
From a value persprctive, landed cheong more during bull run, but drop more during bear run. It is not a fact but a historical observation.
landed bull run are being exaggerated by the fact that many old landed houses were bought for rebuilding and A&A before being resold in the market. And URA data doesnt capture that, so if you buy $1m landed, spend $500K in rebuilding and sold at $2m, URA data will capture 100% gain.
When in actual fact there is only 33% gain. (500/1500)
Despite someone saying that he is done with this thread, that person is extraordinarily active. 5th time he has posted again and gone against his word. I wouldn't put much credence on the postings of someone like that.
I am done with this thread. Good luck to your economic fairytale
Some people like to cloud the issue here by saying that the gains that people make from landed are over exaggerated etc.
I have already shown that it is not the case for all landed transactions hence you cannot assume that the price index is totally skewed.
The fact of the matter is that the transaction has been sealed and the selling price recorded between a willing buyer and willing seller.
As mentioned by someone else in this thread, I quote:
Simple.. Cos landed mostly own stay. Condos a lot bought for investment.....
The value proposition of a person buying for own stay vs the value proposition of a person buying for pure investment gains or returns is totally different. If you take the assumption that all landed buyers go in with the value proposition like a pure condo investor, then you will definitely end up being confused.
For someone who cannot differentiate between price and value, it might be quite a difficult concept to grasp.
Relax everyone... Relax.
Landed or condo both are good.
Both have pros and cons, and we all know that. Fish sellers say their fish is the freshest, fruit sellers say theirs is the most fragrant.
In fact, HDB also good. Also, no ownership of any type of housing also not bad (although I won't subscribe to this), depending on conditions. They are the only group of so-called first-timers in this current market.
What is great today might not be so tomorrow. To each his own. Let's not douse each others' preference. It's all a matter of perspective anyway.
And within a segment there are also so many different types. For example, there are so many types of landed, or condo available. Each has its own cost structure and merits for the specific lifestyle one wants.
Value of property is best measure by what tenants are willing to pay not by what owners think. If you are getting abnormally low yield please don't blame the market for being stupid.
Still around? Some people just really like to be embarrassed in public.
So a person who buys a landed for own stay will worry about rental yield?
Hi...I am keen in exchanging my Tiong Bahru 5 room HDB flat to a new landed Pavilion Park in Bukit Gombak area.
Can someone shed some insights on the potential upsides and downsides? TIA.
Relax everyone... Relax.
Landed or condo both are good.
Both have pros and cons, and we all know that. Fish sellers say their fish is the freshest, fruit sellers say theirs is the most fragrant.
In fact, HDB also good. Also, no ownership of any type of housing also not bad (although I won't subscribe to this), depending on conditions. They are the only group of so-called first-timers in this current market.
What is great today might not be so tomorrow. To each his own. Let's not douse each others' preference. It's all a matter of perspective anyway.
And within a segment there are also so many different types. For example, there are so many types of landed, or condo available. Each has its own cost structure and merits for the specific lifestyle one wants.
Thanks for the perspective. I am very relaxed as this is quite entertaining. I thought somebody was done here but they keep crawling back for more punishment...
I am done with this thread. Good luck to your economic fairytale
landed bull run are being exaggerated by the fact that many old landed houses were bought for rebuilding and A&A before being resold in the market. And URA data doesnt capture that, so if you buy $1m landed, spend $500K in rebuilding and sold at $2m, URA data will capture 100% gain.
When in actual fact there is only 33% gain. (500/1500)
Do you own the construction company? $500k for a rebuild? In your dreams?
Oh Its possible.... You meant buying a single storey IT and rebuilding it as a brand new single storey. Smart move pal.
Kudos to the TS for this thread so that all facts/myths can be scrutinised and debated upon. At the end of the day, its good learning for everyone.
For all that is being discussed and said, the landed market is still moving. The caveat is where. I guess the cliche saying would be : Location Location Location
If you do not have the data then how can you say I am wrong? You are just making assumptions yourself but what is worse is that you do not even have any hard figures to show or validate your position. So far, all I have heard from you is conjecture. My conclusion could very well be correct but that is something you cannot prove otherwise.
I am stating what the statistics show which is during the crash, the percentage of condo owners that sold off at the distress prices was more than double that the percentage of landed owners and the indications from these figures are that landed owners probably weathered the crash better. Whether readers believe in what I am laying out here, I leave it to them to decide but for you to say that my conclusion is wrong is totally unjustified and I think you should retract your statement unless you have hard figures to prove me wrong.
You just want to interpret data according to what you want to hear. Yes, less percentage of landed owners sold during crisis. Does that mean landed got more holding power?
Can you answer the following backed up with FACTS and DATA?
1. Those condo owners who sold are not themselves landed owners?
2. Those condo owners who sold had multiple properties and those they sold were not own stay, but investment homes?
3. Those condo owners who sold ALL made huge losses?
4. Those landed owners who held onto their property actually bought them cheap in the 70s and 80s? How many percent?
5. ALL those condo owners who sold because they couldn't hold on to their properties?
I am not claiming anything. I am just saying that you cannot conclude anything based on those data alone.
A dog has four legs. But, it does not mean that any animal with four legs are dogs. GET IT?
Thanks to bullman for the compliments. Now that the noise has died down abit, lets touch on some of the concerns that some people have raised here about how some of the data I have shown only provides cold comfort to landed buyers.
4. Debt Service Capability of Landed Buyers
Let's forget about 1997 and focus on the now since this is where it matters
As at 3Q 2012, this is the position of all housing loans in Singapore (data source : LoanGuru)
http://blog.loanguru.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Diagram-3.png
The total housing loans stood at about $16bil with condo buyers forming almost 60% of the total, landed buyers accounting for just slightly over 19% and the rest for HDB/EC..
LoanGuru has analysed the data of each type of loan as well as the income profile of each borrower and derived an average figure as well as debt service capability.
http://blog.loanguru.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Diagram-1.png
I% is the all-in interest rate, MI stands for monthly instalment, DSR stands for Debt Servicing Ratio which is a common ratio used by banks to determine the debt servicing capability of borrowers. It is derived by dividing the MI over the monthly income of the borrower. The rough rule of thumb used by banks is that the lower the DSR, the better. Below 0.3 is considered healthy whereas between 0.3 to 0.4 is still manageable but between 0.4 to 0.5 is indicative of difficulties in servicing the loan.
I think the numbers speak for themselves. The 1X was used to illustrate sensitivity analysis and I shall not go into the details as you can just play around with the interest rate yourselves. I also hope this will address fclim's concerns.
Going forward if u think our rich and poor gap will widen further, then landed property could be the best investment in future. Furthermore, new supply of FH landed is non existant.
However u must have the holding power to ride through the down cycle as rental yield is very low.
I really wonder why proper-t doesnt want other to read the article for themselves to see what its all about. Instead he would like to quote pcs of the article without giving any links, and give his own silly interpretation like he is an GURU.
If someone cant even get the basic fundamental of supply and demand effect on property price, you will need to stop reading his nonsense.
Going forward if u think our rich and poor gap will widen further, then landed property could be the best investment in future. Furthermore, new supply of FH landed is non existant.
However u must have the holding power to ride through the down cycle as rental yield is very low.
If what the below forumer thinks is true and most landed is for own stay, then rental yield is a non-issue. In fact, the roof over their heads will be the singular most important asset that they own and I doubt if any owner will want to take excessive financial risk to fund it. Furthermore, if its for own stay, a low rental yield is beneficial as it translates to a low annual value and hence lower property tax.
Simple.. Cos landed mostly own stay. Condos a lot bought for investment.....
Going forward if u think our rich and poor gap will widen further, then landed property could be the best investment in future. Furthermore, new supply of FH landed is non existant.
However u must have the holding power to ride through the down cycle as rental yield is very low.
Yes and no.
Yes : Rich and poor gap is widening, and thats the reason why you are seeing record prices for GCB and landed property in Sentosa
No : Not all landed owners are wealthy and not all landed properties are attractive to rich people.
I really wonder why proper-t doesnt want other to read the article for themselves to see what its all about. Instead he would like to quote pcs of the article without giving any links, and give his own silly interpretation like he is an GURU.
If someone cant even get the basic fundamental of supply and demand effect on property price, you will need to stop reading his nonsense.
It is quite sad when some folks have to continually swallow their pride and come crawling back to a thread that they have declared they are done with it just to throw taunts at other people. If they are not even contributing to the discussion by offering substantive and logical statements, then what's the point of even being in a forum ?
I am done with this thread. Good luck to your economic fairytale
There is nothing to hide as I just state facts. Here is the link for all to read and digest:
http://blog.loanguru.com.sg/1082/3-golden-rules-of-property-loan-acquisition.html
Haha, Ringo.....Ringo..... You like to talk bullshit, don't you? Since you implied that you know supply and demand effect on property, so please advise what is the supply pipeline of landed properties in Singapore? How about the demand of landed properties from new citizens? In fact, the number of FREEHOLD landed properties are shrinking due to enbloc of existing landed properties sitting on land with plot ratio of 1.4 and above. Don't try to mislead people in this forum by talking down landed properties based on your illogical logic.
If someone cant even get the basic fundamental of supply and demand effect on property price, you will need to stop reading his nonsense.
There is nothing to hide as I just state facts. Here is the link for all to read and digest:
http://blog.loanguru.com.sg/1082/3-golden-rules-of-property-loan-acquisition.html
In the article, they only did a theoretical comparison how DSR will move if interest rate rises etc, but it fail to talk about what happen to landed property during a crisis.
In the table, they are using average MI/ Average income.
So my question is consider the massive price gap of landed property and buyer profile for landed property in Singapore, where one end of the spectrum could be a billionaire buying his 3 or 4th investment GCB property costing $20-30m each and bought it with cash, while on the other end could be a average income salary man buying a LH terrace houses that cost <1.5m with 80% loan.
So if 20% of the landed property buyers have an annual income of say >$2m per year and bought their property with minimal or zero loan, will that give you a false impression that most landed owners are making $22k income per month and their average loan about is 1.9m?
The article also mentioned that in 2003, interest rate rises and all segment except landed property owner exceeded 50% DSR. So my question is, did you see an dip in condo or apartment prices in 2003/4 (see the reality URA Chart)
And IIRC, the interest rate for during 2000 and 2008 were pretty stable, however we did see a massive price correction of landed property during both period, which I believe DSR for landed owners were clearly <50%.
So my question is, does this article mean anything in real world?
And if indeed landed property owners have such good holding power, then why detach houses suffer to most massive price correction during 97-99? where landed property owners different from those we see today?
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/787/propertyindex.jpg
Haha, Ringo.....Ringo..... You like to talk bullshit, don't you? Since you implied that you know supply and demand effect on property, so please advise what is the supply pipeline of landed properties in Singapore? How about the demand of landed properties from new citizens? In fact, the number of FREEHOLD landed properties are shrinking due to enbloc of existing landed properties sitting on land with plot ratio of 1.4 and above. Don't try to mislead people in this forum by talking down landed properties based on your illogical logic.
Oh please dont cut into this discussion and start talking about something else. Please have the courtesy to read what was written before commenting.
reading will actually make a person more knowledgeable.
Haha, Ringo.....Ringo.....Some people like you are destined to be a loser and can only envy people living in a landed property. Meanwhile, I am going to swim a few laps in my private pool. LOL
Oh please dont cut into this discussion and start talking about something else. Please have the courtesy to read what was written before commenting.
reading will actually make a person more knowledgeable.
Since you continually want to come here to be embarrassed, so be it. Please stop posting that silly chart and lumping all your incoherent thoughts together if you expect a logical answer in return. Please see my replies in red.
In the article, they only did a theoretical comparison how DSR will move if interest rate rises etc, but it fail to talk about what happen to landed property during a crisis.
In the table, they are using average MI/ Average income.
So my question is consider the massive price gap of landed property and buyer profile for landed property in Singapore, where one end of the spectrum could be a billionaire buying his 3 or 4th investment GCB property costing $20-30m each and bought it with cash, while on the other end could be a average income salary man buying a LH terrace houses that cost <1.5m with 80% loan.
So if 20% of the landed property buyers have an annual income of say >$2m per year and bought their property with minimal or zero loan, will that give you a false impression that most landed owners are making $22k income per month and their average loan about is 1.9m?
Your question already shows that you read but you don't even understand the data or how it is collated. Firstly, if a person bought it with cash, it wouldn't even be captured in the data as it only tracks BORROWERS.
The article also mentioned that in 2003, interest rate rises and all segment except landed property owner exceeded 50% DSR. So my question is, did you see an dip in condo or apartment prices in 2003/4 (see the reality URA Chart)
Here is where you read but don't do your own research. The run-up in interest rate started in 2003 and peaked somewhere in 2006/7. see chart below showing SIBOR rates in blue.
http://www.singaporepropertycycle.com.sg/charts/Singapore-Property-Price-Index-and-3-Month-SIBOR.jpg
Because of the lag effect of an interest rate adjustment, this hit home hard in 2008 which btw caused APTs and CONDOS to tumble the most.
And IIRC, the interest rate for during 2000 and 2008 were pretty stable, however we did see a massive price correction of landed property during both period, which I believe DSR for landed owners were clearly <50%.
Do you even know how to interpret you own chart? In 2000, almost all segments were at the same level so how can you say there was a massive price correction just for landed. In 2008, what tumbled the most was APTS followed by CONDOS and NOT landed. Why it happened is explained in my previous answer. Go see the interest rate chart. It just shows that some people read without thinking
So my question is, does this article mean anything in real world?
The answer is YES but only for those who know how to read and understand it properly
And if indeed landed property owners have such good holding power, then why detach houses suffer to most massive price correction during 97-99? where landed property owners different from those we see today?
You have obviously not been following this thread, go back to the beginning and read.
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/787/propertyindex.jpg
For someone who has posted and used this chart numerous times as their calling card, it is not only roll on floor hilarious but clearly demonstrates the intelligence level of the person when they can't even interpret their own chart properly. Next he'll give an excuse that he is colour blind...
And IIRC, the interest rate for during 2000 and 2008 were pretty stable, however we did see a massive price correction of landed property during both period, which I believe DSR for landed owners were clearly <50%.
http://i1292.photobucket.com/albums/b566/proper-t/ppi_zpsdad31159.jpg
I am not sure why do you even need to crop the URA chart. The only reason I can think of is you trying to hide the bad things and only show the good things.
While you are trying to tell us landed property owner has got better holding power etc, however the chart doesnt quite reflect that.
1) The correction in 2000 to 2003 was due to dot com bubble and SARS, nothing to do with interest rate,
2) The 2008 correction again is due to financial crisis, nothing to do with interest rate.
So proper-T, please stop trying to smoke us with all you nonsensical cut and paste lah.
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/787/propertyindex.jpg
http://i1292.photobucket.com/albums/b566/proper-t/ppi_zpsdad31159.jpg
The reason for the crop is simple. Please explain to readers here your statement below (especially the part in red) ,in relation to the chart. I crop it Big in case you are colour blind.Can you tell all here which segments drop the most in 2000 & 2008?
And IIRC, the interest rate for during 2000 and 2008 were pretty stable, however we did see a massive price correction of landed property during both period, which I believe DSR for landed owners were clearly <50%.
I am not sure why do you even need to crop the URA chart. The only reason I can think of is you trying to hide the bad things and only show the good things.
While you are trying to tell us landed property owner has got better holding power etc, however the chart doesnt quite reflect that.
1) The correction in 2000 to 2003 was due to dot com bubble and SARS, nothing to do with interest rate,
2) The 2008 correction again is due to financial crisis, nothing to do with interest rate.
So proper-T, please stop trying to smoke us with all you nonsensical cut and paste lah.
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/787/propertyindex.jpg
http://i1292.photobucket.com/albums/b566/proper-t/ppi_zpsdad31159.jpg
can share how the burglar enter your house through your neighbour's house?
that neighbour's house was under construction, so its easy to get in. just hv to climb up the top of roof and walk to any unit they like and climb down with the help of pipes outside the house to ur unit. they manage to break the sliding window and grille.
Do you still own any of the terraces?
sold them to downgrade to condo...:banghead:
sold them to downgrade to condo...:banghead:
No worries lah... If you bought yr condo 11 yrs ago, you are still sitting on a good gain. To me, its pointless to look back or envy other people. Be content with what you have.
Once you have ever lived in bungalow in the sky, you will never want to live on a landed! :tongue3:
People who live in bungalow in the sky will not be bothered with that small additional maintenance fund costs.
It looks like people living in landed are very particular about saving those small maintenance costs, to the extend of delaying whatever repairs and maintenance they need to do? They are so cheapo / desperate / cheapskate? Now then I know! :doh:
Bungalow in the sky? Can you find one which has 7000 sqft built-in like a bungalow on the ground? :sleep:
So r u saying that maintenance for a bungalow in the sky is "ADDITIONAL" maintenance as compared to a landed bungalow which is self contradictory to your previous harping about high maintenance for landed? :D
BLUE, just wondering from SEP 2012 to this week you have not post anything on this forum and suddenly you felt the urge in doing so this week.
I just wondering have you been secretly and despicably posting using a different account??
Well, I have been busy with my landed reno and enjoying the BIGGER, PRIVATE & EXCLUSIVE space that I have now.
And one fine day came back to this forum to see anything interesting but still find you lurking around the landed forum, continue posting baseless negative comments which you hope can have some effect on the market so tat u may buy landed cheap one day or an attempt to drive down landed demand so that potential buyers turn to MM condo instead?
Despite your unrelenting efforts and attempts, the landed price continues to soar like no tomorrow.
Now it is even harder to find $1000 psf for a good piece of old land to do own rebuilding. :cheers5:
I heard for a build up of let say 3000sqft, it will cost 350psf now. Is it true? It is so costly to rebuild now.
I heard for a build up of let say 3000sqft, it will cost 350psf now. Is it true? It is so costly to rebuild now.
Maybe 300 Psf. But 350 means high quality with pool
It is more expensive and having only less skillful worker.
Maybe 300 Psf. But 350 means high quality with pool
Mmm, Many penthouses are 4000+ sqft built-in, and there are 6000+ sqft units also and penthouses. You want to search you will find. Additional maintenances are for the facilities. The high maintenence for landed is although without facilities. I am experienced enough to know the difference. :rolleyes:
Bungalow in the sky? Can you find one which has 7000 sqft built-in like a bungalow on the ground? :sleep:
So r u saying that maintenance for a bungalow in the sky is "ADDITIONAL" maintenance as compared to a landed bungalow which is self contradictory to your previous harping about high maintenance for landed? :D
Once you have ever lived in bungalow in the sky, you will never want to live on a landed!
People who live in bungalow in the sky will not be bothered with that small additional maintenance fund costs.
It looks like people living in landed are very particular about saving those small maintenance costs, to the extend of delaying whatever repairs and maintenance they need to do? They are so cheapo / desperate / cheapskate? Now then I know!
Thanks to all for keeping this thread alive.
Please note that there has been no studies or reports (at least as far I am aware) done on maintenance cost for condos/apts vs landed and hence no empricial evidence is available to prove that one is costlier or cheaper than the other.
As a point of reference, an apartment at Hamilton at Scotts (2756sf) has an estimated maintenance fee of $1,500 per month. This translates to $18,000 p.a. or $4,500 per quarter.
This $18K per year is a mandatory expenditure and buyers should note that it is an offence not to pay the maintenance fees. The legal remedies which your MC can take to recover the fees are outlined below as described in an extract of a condo resident's handbook.
5. Late payment interest (rates to be determined by the Management) will be levied on Maintenance Charges not received after 30 days from the date of notice to pay.
6. Further legal action shall be taken should the Subsidiary Proprietor continue to default on Maintenance payment. The following action could be taken by the MCST to recover arrears :-
a. Lodge a charge against the said unit (SP will be prevented from selling the unit unless outstanding maintenance charges, with interest, are fully paid);
b. Application of garnishment order on the unit, if the Subsidiary Proprietor is collecting rental from the unit;
c. File legal claim at the Small Claims Tribunal;
d. Application to the courts to have the unit sold to recover all outstanding maintenance charges still owing
The above mentioned legal actions are enforceable under the BMSMA (2004)
Wonder how many owners pay $1800 per month to maintain a landed property?
Thanks to all for keeping this thread alive.
Please note that there has been no studies or reports (at least as far I am aware) done on maintenance cost for condos/apts vs landed and hence no empricial evidence is available to prove that one is costlier or cheaper than the other.
As a point of reference, an apartment at Hamilton at Scotts (2756sf) has an estimated maintenance fee of $1,500 per month. This translates to $18,000 p.a. or $4,500 per quarter.
This $18K per year is a mandatory expenditure and buyers should note that it is an offence not to pay the maintenance fees. The legal remedies which your MC can take to recover the fees are outlined below as described in an extract of a condo resident's handbook.
The fact is, there shouldn't be any comparisons on landed and condo maintenance as they are not apple to apple.
you can bring up for discussion on the different range of fee per month or year but it is really pointless to compare. There could be very min ppl pay for their short term stay in landed says 5 yrs, but on the other hand, you can easily calculate out how much one pays if he stays in condo for the facilities...it might be worth for some one but not worth for some one...or on the other hand, the owner of the landed could need to pay a big sum to repair leaked roof and peeled paint on the exterior compared to somebody who only pay for a small fee per month in condo....many many scenario...:)
there are many type of landed property owners in Singapore lah. Some are asset rich cash rich, so they will not save on repair cost and utility bills.
On the other hand, they are also many landed owners who like to brag about landed property, but they are so damn cash poor that they need to live like a church rat, saving on utilities, skip maintenance and repair etc.
As the saying goes, if you feet aint that big, please dont wear such a big shoe.
Thanks to all for keeping this thread alive.
unfortunately, no one is interested to discuss about the nonsense you posted. FACT is FACT, there is no such thing as a real FACTS. If you need to call it REAL, that mean they aint real.
unfortunately, no one is interested to discuss about the nonsense you posted. FACT is FACT, there is no such thing as a real FACTS. If you need to call it REAL, that mean they aint real.
I suppose others don't think the way you do as this thread has stretched to 11 pages already with over 4900 views.
If someone doesn't like what is being being discussed here, then they are welcome to leave and never come back but then there are some extremely thick-skinned people with no integrity (and probably low self-esteem) here who despite declaring that they are done with the thread, continually come crawlng back.
I am done with this thread. Good luck to your economic fairytale
Unfortunately, there are also some people here who like to post untruths and label them as facts so there is certaintly a distinction being drawn here between a real fact and some untruths which are being labelled as facts.
What's worse are people who continually like to post charts or information which they themselves don't know how to interpret.
The reason for the crop is simple. Please explain to readers here your statement below (especially the part in red) ,in relation to the chart. I crop it Big in case you are colour blind.Can you tell all here which segments drop the most in 2000 & 2008?
And IIRC, the interest rate for during 2000 and 2008 were pretty stable, however we did see a massive price correction of landed property during both period, which I believe DSR for landed owners were clearly <50%.
I am not sure why do you even need to crop the URA chart. The only reason I can think of is you trying to hide the bad things and only show the good things.
While you are trying to tell us landed property owner has got better holding power etc, however the chart doesnt quite reflect that.
1) The correction in 2000 to 2003 was due to dot com bubble and SARS, nothing to do with interest rate,
2) The 2008 correction again is due to financial crisis, nothing to do with interest rate.
So proper-T, please stop trying to smoke us with all you nonsensical cut and paste lah.
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/787/propertyindex.jpg
http://i1292.photobucket.com/albums/b566/proper-t/ppi_zpsdad31159.jpg
I suppose others don't think the way you do as this thread has stretched to 11 pages already with over 4900 views.
If someone doesn't like what is being being discussed here, then they are welcome to leave and never come back but then there are some extremely thick-skinned people with no integrity (and probably low self-esteem) here who despite declaring that they are done with the thread, continually come crawlng back.
Unfortunately, there are also some people here who like to post untruths and label them as facts so there is certaintly a distinction being drawn here between a real fact and some untruths which are being labelled as facts.
What's worse are people who continually like to post charts or information which they themselves don't know how to interpret.
bro, this joker's take on landed property is as convincing as his deductions that the 3rd IR will be in jurong.
Maybe 300 Psf. But 350 means high quality with pool
Even at 300 psf, I think that the quality is already pretty good with private lift and micro pile.
bro, this joker's take on landed property is as convincing as his deductions that the 3rd IR will be in jurong.
Well said buddy, hopefully you are enjoying yourself at PSB.
Even at 300 psf, I think that the quality is already pretty good with private lift and micro pile.
Dont fool yourself, @ 300psf you will only get HDB quality, nothing near pretty good for mass market condo standard.
If you pay peanuts you get monkeys,
I paid $150psf excluding professional fee 12 years ago for the reconstruction of my house. $300psf minus professional fee is still possible.
Dont fool yourself, @ 300psf you will only get HDB quality, nothing near pretty good for mass market condo standard.
If you pay peanuts you get monkeys,
350psf was quoted with interior furnishing similar to condo offered by developers. Comes with kitchen cabinets, aircon, wardrobes, marble and timber flooring etc.
So u guys are talking about reconstruction with bare interior for 300psf?
Friend, the $300psf includes all those in a condo. I paid half of that when I reconstruct as labour, material and GST are lower.
350psf was quoted with interior furnishing similar to condo offered by developers. Comes with kitchen cabinets, aircon, wardrobes, marble and timber flooring etc.
So u guys are talking about reconstruction with bare interior for 300psf?
Friend, the $300psf includes all those in a condo. I paid half of that when I reconstruct as labour, material and GST are lower.
I am more interested to know the cost today.
Thanks for your contribution too.
I am more interested to know the cost today.
Thanks for your contribution too.
http://www.meridianhomes.com.sg/web2009/template02.php?pg=cat_newhouses
My neighbour just did his for $300-400psf including professional fee too. But the workmanship is fair poorer with lower grade material like with only homogenous tile instead of marble. Less skill tradesmen and cut corner too as I was the indirect PM.
I am more interested to know the cost today.
Thanks for your contribution too.
http://www.meridianhomes.com.sg/web2009/template02.php?pg=cat_newhouses
The boss, Jaffar is a nice guy. I have used their services before.
there are many type of landed property owners in Singapore lah. Some are asset rich cash rich, so they will not save on repair cost and utility bills.
On the other hand, they are also many landed owners who like to brag about landed property, but they are so damn cash poor that they need to live like a church rat, saving on utilities, skip maintenance and repair etc.
As the saying goes, if you feet aint that big, please dont wear such a big shoe.
To buy a brand new landed hse in today's market, one's foot has to be decently big. Not any tom, dick or harry can even afford the downpayment.:tsk-tsk:
Landed maintenance: once you have a pool, the maintenance is no longer "discretionary" ;) Tis thing cost min $500 a month ... So cannot really compare "maintenance cost" lah. Really apple to orange.
And peace to every one...landed or condo, very personal preference ... which one better "investment choice", well, every one can agree to disagree... Just like CCR OCR debates. :)
Once you have a lift, the maintenance is lagi beyond 'discretionary'. I need a lift if I need to stay in landed, too taxing to climb 2-3 storeys up and down the whole day. :banghead:
Landed maintenance: once you have a pool, the maintenance is no longer "discretionary" ;) Tis thing cost min $500 a month ... So cannot really compare "maintenance cost" lah. Really apple to orange.
And peace to every one...landed or condo, very personal preference ... which one better "investment choice", well, every one can agree to disagree... Just like CCR OCR debates. :)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4119/4862287498_886398d075.jpg
Wait until you reach my age then you will know! :tongue3:
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8291/7626209826_c619a7917b.jpg
Not that bad la! I still can run in Botanic garden every day. :p
hahahaha....
http://www.askmen.com/top_10/fitness_top_ten/20_fitness_list.html
Number 9
Take the stairs
There's a reason why a piece of exercise equipment was designed after a staircase. Climbing stairs provides a thorough aerobic workout, and will help tone muscles in your calves, thighs and buttocks. In fact, taking the real stairs will provide something of an upper body workout that the stair climber in the gym won't, thanks to an absence of armrests to lean on.
As stair climbing is a weight-bearing exercise (meaning that you support your own weight as you do it), it strengthens your bones. Bypassing the elevator is also a great way to burn twice as many calories as you would walking; climbing six flights a day over a full year could shed up to 18 pounds.
Read more: http://www.askmen.com/top_10/fitness_top_ten/20_fitness_list.html#ixzz2Oqtt6rGh
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KmJ8ztyKYWs/0.jpg
To buy a brand new landed hse in today's market, one's foot has to be decently big. Not any tom, dick or harry can even afford the downpayment.:tsk-tsk:
nah...most brother here can easily buy a 7 to 10m landed property if they are crazy enough to leverage themselves to their neck and they dont even need to brag about it. That is what separate an investor to a home owner.
http://www.askmen.com/top_10/fitness_top_ten/20_fitness_list.html
so for landed property owner, climbing stairs is consider an exercise?
hmm...I condo we have plenty of stairs to clim, BUT I would rather go to my condo gym for a good and complet workout and then jump into the jacuzzi to relax myself.
Luckily, I am not staying in the same condo as you. The jacuzzi water must b very unhygienic. Next time, plse shower first before you jump into the jacuzzi. Be considerate!
so for landed property owner, climbing stairs is consider an exercise?
hmm...I condo we have plenty of stairs to clim, BUT I would rather go to my condo gym for a good and complet workout and then jump into the jacuzzi to relax myself.
Luckily, I am not staying in the same condo as you. The jacuzzi water must b very unhygienic. Next time, plse shower first before you jump into the jacuzzi. Be considerate!
nah I was just kidding our landed property sua ku.
the only time I go to jacuzzi is during when we have a pool side BBQ.
You can climb up n down cos' your landed house doesnt have many storeys and also not high enought! I used to stay in a Bungalow with basement and attic and every floor has very high ceiling, so total 4 storeys including basement and attic), grand spiral stairs means long flight. U really need a lift to access attic, if u want to go to attic (not exactly attic, but actually is another floor at top level), u need to take lift. Imagine that if u left a book in attic and you are rushing to go out, no joke if u have no lift!:scared-5:
You can climb up n down cos' your landed house doesnt have many storeys and also not high enought! I used to stay in a Bungalow with basement and attic and every floor has very high ceiling, so total 4 storeys including basement and attic), grand spiral stairs means long flight. U really need a lift to access attic, if u want to go to attic (not exactly attic, but actually is another floor at top level), u need to take lift. Imagine that if u left a book in attic and you are rushing to go out, no joke if u have no lift!:scared-5:
yes, seems that most new landed house have lifts installed.
Enough said....notice the poor attempt at recovery..
teddybear, since you believed him, does that make you a sua ku?
so for landed property owner, climbing stairs is consider an exercise?
hmm...I condo we have plenty of stairs to clim, BUT I would rather go to my condo gym for a good and complet workout and then jump into the jacuzzi to relax myself.
Luckily, I am not staying in the same condo as you. The jacuzzi water must b very unhygienic. Next time, plse shower first before you jump into the jacuzzi. Be considerate!
nah I was just kidding our landed property sua ku.
the only time I go to jacuzzi is during when we have a pool side BBQ.
That is why 3 storeys are still manageable. Must always have a sizeable room on the ground floor.
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KmJ8ztyKYWs/0.jpg
felicia_sg
29-03-13, 17:03
Enough said....notice the poor attempt at recovery..
teddybear, since you believed him, does that make you a sua ku?
-----
a logical person will never say that living in landed property is cheaper than condo because we all know that what most landed owners are pay in utility bills every month will be more than what most condo owners are paying for maintenance.
while we are at it, please do also remember that what condo dwellers are paying in maintenance is not just four walls and a door, they are paying for tangible benefits like having landscape kids play ground. swimming pool, jacuzzi, function room, gym, tennis court, security, BBQ pit, view etc.
And unless you have concrete statistics and fact to prove, if not please dont say that condo dwellers doesnt use their facilities.
Sorry to say this. electricity rates are the same every where except for industry use. Only part more expensive is the number of toilet (5-6 on average) that you pay per month + the refuse collection (not that much).
Huh? Do you know the difference between discretionary and mandatory? It doesn't mean one is more expensive than the other
Perhaps you didn't read my first statement properly
If you referring to cost avoidance then yes.
For landed vs condo, one is shared cost while the other is from the owners pocket. But then again, there is no sinking funds to be paid as well.
How to compare apple to orange?
Condo got swimming pool, gym, playground, greenery all around, tennis court, common facilities and big landscaping.
Landed 3000 sqft got what swimming pool, tennis court, ...??? :doh:
End up people still unable to provide concrete evidence and claim that landed overall maintenance and costs is cheaper than condos despite having nothing that condos have! :p
I would imagine the cost would "fixed" as in a basket of items with a attached cost.
Landed owners / investors are different in mindset.
Some wants a landed because of large family with equal number of cars and condo is a no no.
Some may argue that not all that stays in landed are like that .
we all have differing views and it does not have a one size fits all kind of response.
In fact, some good points have been highlighted. Not everyone would have the same response to marrying or for that matter even buying a car.
Buy MPV ? siao .. after that a lorry crash into you whole family die.. some may say buy car in SG is never cheap ..but we are deviating ...
Once u stayed in spacious landed, u probably wont want to squeeze in condos. U can play hide and seek in a landed, but certainly not for condo unit, cos a 360 degree turn, u can see everything!
Just like once u own a private car, u probably wont want to squeeze in buses / mrt trains.
:D
The point about maintenance, what one pays for monthly maintenance in a condo is only for the external shared facilities, cleaning and security. These are mandatory whether or not there are damages, and whether or not the damages are critical. It does not cover your internal live-in area, which you still need to pay extra yourself.
Whereas for landed, indeed maintenance is discretionary mostly unless critical damages.
And the point about higher utilities bills, it is all about usage and not about the size although landed incurs more sanitary charges due to the number of bathrooms you have.
Property tax for landed (expressed as a % of the purchase price) is also lower than condo due to lower rental yield. :rolleyes:
X2
10 chars
Actually for retirees, it better to live in condo than landed because is condo, you have got facilities to keep yourself active like pools , gym, exercise corner etc. Plus you dont really need a car because many condos will offer feeder service to bring to you to nearby MRT station and shopping mall etc.
Sorry to say this. electricity rates are the same every where except for industry use. Only part more expensive is the number of toilet (5-6 on average) that you pay per month + the refuse collection (not that much).
The killer cost for landed property is not the toilet, its the air conditioning.
Bigger space = higher btu compressor, more lightings = higher electricity consumption, there is no need to debate
Plus, for those who are afraid of mosquitoes, they will always sleep with aircon on, 365 days a year.
If you referring to cost avoidance then yes.
For landed vs condo, one is shared cost while the other is from the owners pocket. But then again, there is no sinking funds to be paid as well.
It is not so much about cost avoidance vs shared cost but the fact that condo maintenance fees are mandatory by law.
As a point of reference, for example, Residences @ emerald hill, the monthly maintenance charges ranges from $1,152 to $2,160 per month which translate to $13,824 to $25,920 per year. For an apartment at Hamilton Scotts, the estimated maintenance fee starts from $1,500 per month. This translates to $18,000 p.a. or $4,500 per quarter.
This $18K per year is a mandatory expenditure and buyers should note that it is an offence not to pay the maintenance fees. The legal remedies which your MC can take to recover the fees are outlined below as described in an extract of a condo resident's handbook. This can range from slapping late interest charges, garnishing your rental proceeds to even selling off your unit via a court application.
5. Late payment interest (rates to be determined by the Management) will be levied on Maintenance Charges not received after 30 days from the date of notice to pay.
6. Further legal action shall be taken should the Subsidiary Proprietor continue to default on Maintenance payment. The following action could be taken by the MCST to recover arrears :-
a. Lodge a charge against the said unit (SP will be prevented from selling the unit unless outstanding maintenance charges, with interest, are fully paid);
b. Application of garnishment order on the unit, if the Subsidiary Proprietor is collecting rental from the unit;
c. File legal claim at the Small Claims Tribunal;
d. Application to the courts to have the unit sold to recover all outstanding maintenance charges still owing
The above mentioned legal actions are enforceable under the BMSMA (2004)
Propert-T, I am still waiting for you to tell us what sort of equipment and machine you have at your landed property gym leh.
btw, you might want to use maintenance cost of The Marq to compare to your landed utilities bills. I am sure that will be more appropriate since one have supercar the other also have super-kah (leg) to walk to the nearest bus stop
Propert-T, I am still waiting for you to tell us what sort of equipment and machine you have at your landed property gym leh.
btw, you might want to use maintenance cost of The Marq to compare to your landed utilities bills. I am sure that will be more appropriate since one have supercar the other also have super-kah (leg) to walk to the nearest bus stop
It is quite sad how some people must always compare what they have with others and make themselves feel miserable. Your constant attempts to ask me the same question over and over again seem to have caused your mental state to deteriorate even further.
Who in their right frame of mind compares the maintenance cost of a condo to the utility bills of a landed?
I have heard of people comparing the maintenance cost of a condo to the upkeep/repair cost of a landed property OR the utility bills of one against the other but never your combination. Care to explain your rationale ?
Anyway, the point is not to debate which one is higher, I have already stated many times in this thread that there is no empirical evidence to prove it one way of the other. It is just to give an example of the amount of mandatory payments that one would have to fork out on a monthly basis.
It is quite sad how some people must always compare what they have with others and make themselves feel miserable. Your constant attempts to ask me the same question over and over again seem to have caused your mental state to deteriorate even further.
Who in their right frame of mind compares the maintenance cost of a condo to the utility bills of a landed?
I have heard of people comparing the maintenance cost of a condo to the upkeep/repair cost of a landed property OR the utility bills of one against the other but never your combination. Care to explain your rationale ?
Anyway, the point is not to debate which one is higher, I have already stated many times in this thread that there is no empirical evidence to prove it one way of the other. It is just to give an example of the amount of mandatory payments that one would have to fork out on a monthly basis.
why do you even want to comment about condo maintenance when you dont even have any facilities in your landed homes to compare with?
Perhaps you should compare landed to HDB.
why do you even want to comment about condo maintenance when you dont even have any facilities in your landed homes to compare with?
Perhaps you should compare landed to HDB.
This coming from someone who advocates comparing maintenance cost for condos against utility bills for landed.
Don't you think you have embarrassed yourself enough already. Perhaps you should stick to your original intent and be done with this thread rather than keep tripping over your own statements and making a mockery of yourself. Just from your statement below in post #20 of this thread, it already shows the kind of character you are. Anyone with a sense of integrity and self worth would stick to their declarations. Yet, here you are, continually coming back for more punishment.
I am done with this thread. Good luck to your economic fairytale
proper-T can you tell us how much do you know about this chart that you posted earlier? I think many bros and sisters here are all looking forward to learn from you leh.
http://blog.loanguru.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Diagram-3.png
comfort and peace working out in your personal own gym in your landed property. Can tell us what equipment and machine you have in your gym. share share lah,,,dont be so secretive leh.
proper-T, sometime back you mention that household income is not an important factors to determine holding power for property. Care to explain further on this as I am sure many people would like to know why.
Landed property gives owner the option to have their own design and not with large balcony and aircon ledges.
TO: Ringo33
11x
This refers to the number of times you have resurrected a topic from other threads in which you have lost and are trying to redeem yourself.
I think you have really lost it this time carrying over this inane behaviour of yours from the GCB thread. Your severe condition calls for desperate measures. I know it is painstaking to monitor but this is to help you. I will update this number whenever you post a similar question or repeat a topic. When readers look at this number and realise how extreme you have become, perhaps it will shock you back to reality. Seeing what a pitiable state you are in, it may take a long time but we will eventually hit a number where you will come to your senses and hopefully your condition will improve from there on.
The deep disappointment and trauma suffered from the non-gratification in below post has really made you gone over the deep end..
I was hoping for some sammyboy type of information. so disappointed.
It is not so much about cost avoidance vs shared cost but the fact that condo maintenance fees are mandatory by law.
As a point of reference, for example, Residences @ emerald hill, the monthly maintenance charges ranges from $1,152 to $2,160 per month which translate to $13,824 to $25,920 per year. For an apartment at Hamilton Scotts, the estimated maintenance fee starts from $1,500 per month. This translates to $18,000 p.a. or $4,500 per quarter.
This $18K per year is a mandatory expenditure and buyers should note that it is an offence not to pay the maintenance fees. The legal remedies which your MC can take to recover the fees are outlined below as described in an extract of a condo resident's handbook. This can range from slapping late interest charges, garnishing your rental proceeds to even selling off your unit via a court application.
lets do a simple one that is 400 per month with similar sinking fund.
I paid more than $1k a month in condo maintenance. But add up still more worth it than the landed I used to live in! :beats-me-man:
It is not so much about cost avoidance vs shared cost but the fact that condo maintenance fees are mandatory by law.
As a point of reference, for example, Residences @ emerald hill, the monthly maintenance charges ranges from $1,152 to $2,160 per month which translate to $13,824 to $25,920 per year. For an apartment at Hamilton Scotts, the estimated maintenance fee starts from $1,500 per month. This translates to $18,000 p.a. or $4,500 per quarter.
This $18K per year is a mandatory expenditure and buyers should note that it is an offence not to pay the maintenance fees. The legal remedies which your MC can take to recover the fees are outlined below as described in an extract of a condo resident's handbook. This can range from slapping late interest charges, garnishing your rental proceeds to even selling off your unit via a court application.
lets do a simple one that is 400 per month with similar sinking fund.
I paid more than $1k a month in condo maintenance. But add up still more worth it than the landed I used to live in! :beats-me-man:
I do not know why people are still debating over this. My stance has always been that it is impossible to determine which is higher as there is really no empirical evidence to support either side.
What has been my point is that condo maintenance is a mandatory payment.
In good times, it may not really matter that much to you whether your maintenance payments are $400 or $1500 as long as you have a well paying job and can afford the fees in addition to servicing your housing loans,
But in a down scenario, the fact that condo fees are mandatory will play out to be a crucial factor.
Take for example a landed owner servicing a housing loan with similar monthly instalments as a condo owner. The condo owner has to pay, say, an additional $400 a mth (for samuelk's benefit) in maintenance fees. Both are staying in their respective properties.
Assuming they both lose their jobs and only have enough reserves to service their housing instalment for 12 mths. For the landed owner, his house needs repainting and repairs (say a leaking car porch) of $4,800.
Which position would you rather be in ?
TO: Ringo33
11x
This refers to the number of times you have resurrected a topic from other threads in which you have lost and are trying to redeem yourself.
I think you have really lost it this time carrying over this inane behaviour of yours from the GCB thread. Your severe condition calls for desperate measures. I know it is painstaking to monitor but this is to help you. I will update this number whenever you post a similar question or repeat a topic. When readers look at this number and realise how extreme you have become, perhaps it will shock you back to reality. Seeing what a pitiable state you are in, it may take a long time but we will eventually hit a number where you will come to your senses and hopefully your condition will improve from there on.
The deep disappointment and trauma suffered from the non-gratification in below post has really made you gone over the deep end..
Aiyo, you come to this forum to brag about all your REAL FACT bla bla bla, when I ask you to explain what your post, you change subject to talk about something else.
please stop sniffing around this forum like guard dog lah.
I do not know why people are still debating over this. My stance has always been that it is impossible to determine which is higher as there is really no empirical evidence to support either side.
What has been my point is that condo maintenance is a mandatory payment.
In good times, it may not really matter that much to you whether your maintenance payments are $400 or $1500 as long as you have a well paying job and can afford the fees in addition to servicing your housing loans,
But in a down scenario, the fact that condo fees are mandatory will play out to be a crucial factor.
Take for example a landed owner servicing a housing loan with similar monthly instalments as a condo owner. The condo owner has to pay, say, an additional $400 a mth (for samuelk's benefit) in maintenance fees. Both are staying in their respective properties.
Assuming they both lose their jobs and only have enough reserves to service their housing instalment for 12 mths. For the landed owner, his house needs repainting and repairs (say a leaking car porch) of $4,800.
Which position would you rather be in ?
here we go. all that stupid scenario.
Another WingTai chairman host dinner for super rich huh?
Aiyo, you come to this forum to brag about all your REAL FACT bla bla bla, when I ask you to explain what your post, you change subject to talk about something else.
please stop sniffing around this forum like guard dog lah.
We were talking about condo maintenance fees. Who was the one that changed topic like a stark raving lunatic and started resurrecting other topics in the hope of redeeming himself.
Staying in topic then , can you please explain to all readers here your rationale for comparing the maintenance cost of condos to the utility bills of a landed?
btw, you might want to use maintenance cost of The Marq to compare to your landed utilities bills. I am sure that will be more appropriate since one have supercar the other also have super-kah (leg) to walk to the nearest bus stop
2 semi ds around my area just started doing demolition work, and I think those landed must have been like 20 years or something.
Assuming if they spend around $2m each to do up the place that will last for another 20 years, then it should cost them around $100,000 per year or $8330 per month in depreciation cost. And this is just building depreciation, no facilities whatever to talk about.
For condo, we are lucky to have sinking fund to help keeping our estate and facilities in tip top condition. When things spoil, we repair, we dont need to say we can live without it and let the entire estate rot.
here we go. all that stupid scenario.
Another WingTai chairman host dinner for super rich huh?
Someone really sore that he lost that debate because another forumer 'hopeful' supported me on that one. Read all about it in this thread.
http://forums.condosingapore.com/showthread.php?t=17410&page=16
We were talking about condo maintenance fees. Who was the one that changed topic like a stark raving lunatic and started resurrecting other topics in the hope of redeeming himself.
Staying in topic then , can you please explain to all readers here your rationale for comparing the maintenance cost of condos to the utility bills of a landed?
Like I have said before. why do you even want to compare maintenance fee of condo that is fully equipped with condo facilities, such as 50m lap pools, children playground, jaccuzi, gym, play pool, function room, security etc, to landed property that has no facilities?
Talk about staying in topic. I have asked you countless times to explain what you post in this thread and all you can do is to sniff around like a dog and quoting unrelated post. Is that what you call staying in topic?
Someone really sore that he lost that debate because another forumer 'hopeful' supported me on that one. Read all about it in this thread.
http://forums.condosingapore.com/showthread.php?t=17410&page=16
SUPPORTED....hahaha....
Hopeful, where are you?
Like I have said before. why do you even want to compare maintenance fee of condo that is fully equipped with condo facilities, such as 50m lap pools, children playground, jaccuzi, gym, play pool, function room, security etc, to landed property that has no facilities?
Talk about staying in topic. I have asked you countless times to explain what you post in this thread and all you can do is to sniff around like a dog and quoting unrelated post. Is that what you call staying in topic?
Obviously you have been reading but don't comprehend. Since when in this thread have I ever compared the maintenance cost of condos with that of landed. My stance has always been that it is pointless to compare as there is no empirical evidence to support one side or the other. The only point I have been making is that condo maintenance fees are mandatory.
I suppose the deep disappointment suffer below has caused such a trauma that it dulled your comprehension ability too.
I was hoping for some sammyboy type of information. so disappointed.
Obviously you have been reading but don't comprehend. Since when in this thread have I ever compared the maintenance cost of condos with that of landed. My stance has always been that it is pointless to compare as there is no empirical evidence to support one side or the other. The only point I have been making is that condo maintenance fees are mandatory.
I suppose the deep disappointment suffer below has caused such a trauma that it dulled your comprehension ability too.
Dude, read your first post in this thread and then read what I just highlighted.
Dude, read your first post in this thread and then read what I just highlighted.
From post 2
3. Maintenance cost for landed vs condo/apts.
This has been discussed to no end and there has yet to be any empirical evidence or study to support either side so I will not comment further on which is more costly.
However, what has not been highlighted is the following:
Maintenance expenditure for landed is DISCRETIONARY whilst maintenance payments for condos and apts are MANDATORY.
From post 2
2 semi ds around my area just started doing demolition work, and I think those landed must have been like 20 years or something.
Assuming if they spend around $2m each to do up the place that will last for another 20 years, then it should cost them around $100,000 per year or $8330 per month in depreciation cost. And this is just building depreciation, no facilities whatever to talk about.
For condo, we are lucky to have sinking fund to help keeping our estate and facilities in tip top condition. When things spoil, we repair, we dont need to say we can live without it and let the entire estate rot.
You still haven't explained to readers your basis for comparing the maintenance cost of condos to the utility bills of landed.
btw, you might want to use maintenance cost of The Marq to compare to your landed utilities bills. I am sure that will be more appropriate since one have supercar the other also have super-kah (leg) to walk to the nearest bus stop
Can people really trust the statements of someone who makes a declaration but doesn't honour it?
I am done with this thread. Good luck to your economic fairytale
proud owner
20-04-13, 00:27
i have lived in both landed and condo ...
and still own both ...
this is my personal experience...
i can bbq in my garden ... or club house ..but need to book and pay a deposit which a small part if not refundable for cleaner to clean up the bbq pit..
i dont have a pool in my house ..but i also dont use the pool in my condo ..
i dont have a gym in my house .. i do use the gym in the condo sometimes BUT always crowded .. and i end up in the city gym which i pay monthly...
i dont have security guard in my house ...cos i am not a MP hahahah
over time .. i find i save more $$$ when living in landed ... compared to condo ...
even after 5 yrs or so ... i paid like 7k to repaint my house ... its like $110 a mth
still cheaper than what i pay monthly when staying in condo ..
You still haven't explained to readers your basis for comparing the maintenance cost of condos to the utility bills of landed.
Can people really trust the statements of someone who makes a declaration but doesn't honour it?
Dude before you ask this question did you asked yourself how many of my questions have you not answered?
As for your question we are comparing cost of living in condo and landed and isnt utilities bill the biggest living cost for landed property?
i have lived in both landed and condo ...
and still own both ...
this is my personal experience...
i can bbq in my garden ... or club house ..but need to book and pay a deposit which a small part if not refundable for cleaner to clean up the bbq pit..
i dont have a pool in my house ..but i also dont use the pool in my condo ..
i dont have a gym in my house .. i do use the gym in the condo sometimes BUT always crowded .. and i end up in the city gym which i pay monthly...
i dont have security guard in my house ...cos i am not a MP hahahah
over time .. i find i save more $$$ when living in landed ... compared to condo ...
even after 5 yrs or so ... i paid like 7k to repaint my house ... its like $110 a mth
still cheaper than what i pay monthly when staying in condo ..
Dude you should compare your lifestyle to hdb dweller lah. Why condo?
Are you living alone?what about your families and kids dont they use facilities?
When was the last time you did your A&A
Dude before you ask this question did you asked yourself how many of my questions have you not answered?
As for your question we are comparing cost of living in condo and landed and isnt utilities bill the biggest living cost for landed property?
The subject is maintenance cost. Your specific statement was:
btw, you might want to use maintenance cost of The Marq to compare to your landed utilities bills
I have heard of people comparing the maintenance cost of a condo to the upkeep/repair cost of a landed property OR the utility bills of one against the other but never your combination. Care to explain your rationale ?
The subject is maintenance cost. Your specific statement was:
[/B]
I have heard of people comparing the maintenance cost of a condo to the upkeep/repair cost of a landed property OR the utility bills of one against the other but never your combination. Care to explain your rationale ?
Hey don't be silly your landed property has got nothing to maintain because there are no facilities you get it? Or should we start any thread to talk about utilities bill and aircon btu if your mind cannot cope
Hey don't be silly your landed property has got nothing to maintain because there are no facilities you get it? Or should we start any thread to talk about utilities bill and aircon btu if your mind cannot cope
Please reconcile your statement above with what you said below (especially the part in bold).
I repeat my question again :
I have heard of people comparing the maintenance cost of a condo to the upkeep/repair cost of a landed property OR the utility bills of one against the other but never your combination. Care to explain your rationale ?
I think we shouldnt speculate that all landed property owner are so loaded that they can leave their property vacant, nor they are not desperate for tenant. Honestly if they are not desperate, then why bother to rent out at such low price.
Although landed property doesnt have month maintenance fee, but they do have major repair cost which can run into many thousands once every few years, so not everything is free unless you own land.
Please reconcile your statement above with what you said below (especially the part in bold).
I repeat my question again :
I have heard of people comparing the maintenance cost of a condo to the upkeep/repair cost of a landed property OR the utility bills of one against the other but never your combination. Care to explain your rationale ?
you should spend your time to clarify all those questionable and doubtful "REAL FACTS" that you posted in this forum instead of sniffing around and asking childish questions.
you should spend your time to clarify all those questionable and doubtful "REAL FACTS" that you posted in this forum instead of sniffing around and asking childish questions.
The only childish behaviour I see here is from someone who cannot recover after making an illogical statement of comparing maintenance cost of a condo against the utility bills of a landed and then makes an even more ridiculous statement that landed has 'nothing to maintain' when he clearly contradicts himself in another post he made.
Readers here can follow how he stumbles along below.
btw, you might want to use maintenance cost of The Marq to compare to your landed utilities bills
Hey don't be silly your landed property has got nothing to maintain because there are no facilities you get it? Or should we start any thread to talk about utilities bill and aircon btu if your mind cannot cope
Although landed property doesnt have month maintenance fee, but they do have major repair cost which can run into many thousands once every few years, so not everything is free unless you own land.
I will only try to post this once and not trying to urge with u but just my opinion...
If u keep talking about high maintenance cost on landed and the high utility bill and so on, I can only say that landed is not for u...u can argue until the cow come home...end of the day, it is just not for u.
Why ppl buy conti car when we all know in general, maintenance for Jap car are cheaper? Try doing a normal servicing of an Audi 1.8 and a Toyota 1.8, if u have own both before, u will know what I mean.
Why ppl still buy LV bags when we all know it is just a bag?
Something that u valued might not be of value to another person. So, like it or not, just accept and move on.
:2cents:
2 semi ds around my area just started doing demolition work, and I think those landed must have been like 20 years or something.
Assuming if they spend around $2m each to do up the place that will last for another 20 years, then it should cost them around $100,000 per year or $8330 per month in depreciation cost. And this is just building depreciation, no facilities whatever to talk about.
For condo, we are lucky to have sinking fund to help keeping our estate and facilities in tip top condition. When things spoil, we repair, we dont need to say we can live without it and let the entire estate rot.
I will only try to post this once and not trying to urge with u but just my opinion...
If u keep talking about high maintenance cost on landed and the high utility bill and so on, I can only say that landed is not for u...u can argue until the cow come home...end of the day, it is just not for u.
Why ppl buy conti car when we all know in general, maintenance for Jap car are cheaper? Try doing a normal servicing of an Audi 1.8 and a Toyota 1.8, if u have own both before, u will know what I mean.
Why ppl still buy LV bags when we all know it is just a bag?
Something that u valued might not be of value to another person. So, like it or not, just accept and move on.
:2cents:
I believe I was responding to some who said said that cost of living in landed is cheaper because there is no maintenance fee.
The only childish behaviour I see here is from someone who cannot recover after making an illogical statement of comparing maintenance cost of a condo against the utility bills of a landed and then makes an even more ridiculous statement that landed has 'nothing to maintain' when he clearly contradicts himself in another post he made.
Readers here can follow how he stumbles along below.
might want to tell us what is diagram is all about leh. We are all very eager to learn from guru like you.
http://blog.loanguru.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Diagram-3.png
TO: Ringo33
12x
This refers to the number of times you have resurrected/repeated a topic from this or other threads in which you have lost and are trying to redeem yourself.
More proof of your childish behaviour. I think you have really lost it this time carrying over this inane behaviour of yours from the GCB thread. Your severe condition calls for desperate measures. I know it is painstaking to monitor but this is to help you. I will update this number whenever you post a similar question or repeat a topic. When readers look at this number and realise how extreme you have become, perhaps it will shock you back to reality. Seeing what a pitiable state you are in, it may take a long time but we will eventually hit a number where you will come to your senses and hopefully your condition will improve from there on.
TO: Ringo33
12x
This refers to the number of times you have resurrected/repeated a topic from this or other threads in which you have lost and are trying to redeem yourself.
I think you have really lost it this time carrying over this inane behaviour of yours from the GCB thread. Your severe condition calls for desperate measures. I know it is painstaking to monitor but this is to help you. I will update this number whenever you post a similar question or repeat a topic. When readers look at this number and realise how extreme you have become, perhaps it will shock you back to reality. Seeing what a pitiable state you are in, it may take a long time but we will eventually hit a number where you will come to your senses and hopefully your condition will improve from there on.
you might want to consider explaining what you posted or else you cant blame others to think that your motive here is to try to deceive others into believing what is false.
12X??
That exactly how many times you have tried to avoid answering to my questions.
Its a simple question directing what you have posted. Now some kind of silly question related to "wingtai chairman super rich dinner"
The number is there for a reason.
You probably don't realise how insane your current behaviour looks in front of all the readers here. Continually posting the same question and demanding answers. Carrying that behaviour over from other threads just show readers how unhinged you have become.
I hope you come to your senses soon. You have probably stayed away too long from your favourite forum below because you spend all your time here trying to redeem yourself. I can sense the bitter disappointment in you.
I was hoping for some sammyboy type of information. so disappointed.
What is wrong with Sammyboy? Are you underage?
lucky you correct the spelling. This not Sammyboy forum, no licking NS :).
I usu choose to go up during off peak so I can't really give u accurate info..try asking e guys in Sammyboy forum.
a woman once told me - men must have vices.
therefore, it is better men have vice - car, forum, photography, hifi, golf.
than women, alcohol, smoke, geylang.
wise woman indeed.
(but she forget.. car can have oral sex, forum can go sammyboy, photography can take playboy photo, hifi... dunno, golf female caddy)
Be careful of those nicks that register but never post. And remember, we keep all our discussion to property/investment only ok. Avoid all political topics or foreigner subjects.
We have one common OBJECTIVE:
1) MONEY
We are all here to make money and nothing else. If you guys want to post political topics can, but please let us not discuss about them. You guys can discuss it in Sammyboy or CNA.
Good Luck.
神龙股侠。
wrong forum lah, that's more for sammyboy, they probably have field reports there.
heello fren, long time no see...
so nice to see you active back in this forum...
btw because of your profile pic, at work i now must minimise my browser window...
dangerous, else colleague thought i am posting forum in sammyboy instead....
:D :D :D
for any more discussion of this topic please visit..sammyboy forum....:D:D:D:D:D:D
Mine same except sgcarmart replaced by sammyboy alfresco... :cheers6:
hee hee... Teresa, what you did was kinda childish leh..
It sounds like some of the engagement i have been reading at Sammyboy forum. "Oh! you better becareful, my dad is a policemant, and i will send him to catch you!"
I think the beauty of a forum on internet is anyone should be allowed to say what they want. If you are buying a unit in VP, and you are put off just because of what he says, then i rest my case.
Anyway, i have a unit at VP. The balcony is indeed iron wought. Not that i got anything against it. But what he say is perfectly true.
I did experience some workmenship problem, but they were nothing that i haven't experience in other properties.
I don't have a leaking roof. But it doesn't mean that others don't
the only thing that i have experience so far that is new to me was, one day, the tenant complained that there were squeaking sound from the aircon.... when i sent the repairman to check it out... it turns out a bat was stuck in there....
please don't sue me...
Omega vs Rolex;
Marantz vs Roksan;
Nikon vs Canon;
and here...
CCR vs OCR;
All the forums have this kind of fights where the hardcore fans are defending/advocating their possession.
Only sammyboy don't have xxTN vs yyTN. Probably because none of them own the TNs. :D
:tsk-tsk: :tsk-tsk: :tsk-tsk:
What is wrong with Sammyboy? Are you underage?
proper-t.
what does talking about sammboy has to do with this thread? Do you think that by associating me with a comment I made about sammyboy is going to give you more credit for those nonsense you that post in this forum?
proper-t.
what does talking about sammboy has to do with this thread? Do you think that by associating me with a comment I made about sammyboy is going to give you more credit for those nonsense you that post in this threat?
Someone went to all the trouble of searching for other forumers' comments and reproducing it here.
You think that by associating yourself with these other forumers, you can be redeemed? The difference between all these other forumers and yourself is that none of them expressed the craving and extreme disappointment like you did. Perhaps readers here might then understand why you suddenly lost it and started posting the same questions over and over again. Extended absence from your familiar surroundings or gratification zone can tend to make a man a bit crazy.
I was hoping for some sammyboy type of information. so disappointed.
Someone went to all the trouble of searching for other forumers' comments and reproducing it here.
You think that by associating yourself with these other forumers, you can be redeemed? The difference between all these other forumers and yourself is that none of them expressed the craving and extreme disappointment like you did. Perhaps readers here might then understand why you suddenly lost it and started posting the same questions over and over again. Extended absence from your familiar surroundings or comfort zone can tend to make a man a bit crazy.
Since we are still in this thread about REAL FACTS of landed property, why are you complaining that I am questioning you about the REAL FACTS that you posted? Cant explain yourself? No answer? Blur like sotong?
I am not sure who do you think you are but you behavior suggested that as landed dweller (I dont want to use the word owner because I know you dont own one) you are free to spread BS in this forum and no one is supposed to question you?
When you speak, you speak like there is an entire village or township of landed property owners agreeing with what you wrote, but the fact is that, no one, I repeat, NO ONE has dare to come forward and defend your REAL FACTS about landed property.
No one? At least I have the appreciation of a forumer for starting this thread.
From post #74
Kudos to the TS for this thread so that all facts/myths can be scrutinised and debated upon. At the end of the day, its good learning for everyone.
For all that is being discussed and said, the landed market is still moving. The caveat is where. I guess the cliche saying would be : Location Location Location
You, on the other hand, have 'rave' reviews from other forumers. Someone has even compared you to the infamous Mr. B. In fact, from your postings of late, the resemblance is getting to be quite uncanny.
It has reached beyond the point of using common sense to rationalise with TS (Ringo33). I really question his/her motive of even starting the thread. Not to discuss the movement of landed in 2013, but to "complain".
As many kind souls have pointed out, landed is really free market play. If a new SC has enough moolah to plonk for a few GCBs, then so be it. There is no need to link that with one's daughter/son etc, that is so low IMHO.
Aiyo, Ringo... why are you so against landed property?
we all know that bro ringo is just talking down the landed market because he is looking to buy land...
airspace is overpriced while landspace has yet to fully catch up
he makes as much sense as his arguments that the 3rd IR will be in jurong
Haha, Ringo.....Ringo..... No point for you to post the chart and talk about 1997 rubbish again and again. Nobody here will want to read your rubbish anymore.
If I were you, I would disappear with your infamous user ID and start afresh with a new ID. Hopefully you will talk more sense with a new ID. :tongue3:
Reminds me of TWIST & TURN cum DIVERT ATTENTION EXPERT MR B.. :D
proper-T,
I dont see anyone defending your REAL FACTS, they are only patronizing you for what you wrote without even reading them.
so let me ask you this once again.
why did you say that in a down cycle, low transaction volume is a good?
Care to elaborate?
I would like to see how many here will step forward to defend your REAL FACTS.
while you are at it, why not also comment on this diagram you posted in this forum. What exactly are we supposed to learn from this?
http://blog.loanguru.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Diagram-3.png
If household income is not a good indicator of leveraging risk, may I know what is?
proper-T,
I dont see anyone defending your REAL FACTS, they are only patronizing you for what you wrote without even reading them.
so let me ask you this once again.
why did you say that in a down cycle, low transaction volume is a good?
Care to elaborate?
I would like to see how many here will step forward to defend your REAL FACTS.
Defend? Why do they need to defend when you do a perfectly good job of shooting yourself in the foot or stabbing yourself in the jugular all the time.
Its interesting you asked the same question again because readers here can then know how you turned tail and decided to run from this thread.
Readers here can follow the discussion from post #17 until post #20 where you had nothing to counter and declared
I am done with this thread. Good luck to your economic fairytale
Could you explain to readers what you are still doing in this thread and asking the same questions over again? Are you a man of your word? It appears my diagnosis was right and you have snapped and lost it completely such that integrity matters nothing to you and you feel no shame.
Defend? Why do they need to defend when you do a perfectly good job of shooting yourself in the foot or stabbing yourself in the jugular all the time.
Its interesting you asked the same question again because readers here can then know how you turned tail and decided to run from this thread.
Readers here can follow the discussion from post #17 until post #20 where you had nothing to counter and declared
Could you explain to readers what you are still doing in this thread and asking the same questions over again? Are you a man of your word? It appears my diagnosis was right and you have snapped and lost it completely such that integrity matters nothing to you and you feel no shame.
nothing that you have posted in the last few pages are related to property.
Are you sure you have come to the right forum?
nothing that you have posted in the last few pages are related to property.
Are you sure you have come to the right forum?
Huh? no more stream of repeat questions.
This is a step in the right direction and even though what we are discussing may not be property related, as long it helps you, I will play along.
You seem to be drifting in and out of reality. Spending all your time here trolling the landed forum must be really hard for as you can't get back to your gratification zone below. I suggest you allocate some time back there as your mental state is really erratic.
I was hoping for some sammyboy type of information. so disappointed.
blackjack21trader
22-04-13, 16:55
Both brothers Ringo33 and proper-t are very good debaters. Both logic in the argument also very sound indeed.
I learned a lot from their debates here. Very fruitful for me.
What about you?
:)
Both brothers Ringo33 and proper-t are very good debaters. Both logic in the argument also very sound indeed.
I learned a lot from their debates here. Very fruitful for me.
What about you?
:)
bro BJ, please dont give me so much credit lah. I am just a poor soul looking trying to learn from guru in this forum.
Both brothers Ringo33 and proper-t are very good debaters. Both logic in the argument also very sound indeed.
I learned a lot from their debates here. Very fruitful for me.
What about you?
:)
Thank you for visiting my thread and your kind compliments. Am glad that it has been fruitful for you. As long as a single forumer finds it useful, then this thread is indeed fulfilled...
I will only try to post this once and not trying to urge with u but just my opinion...
If u keep talking about high maintenance cost on landed and the high utility bill and so on, I can only say that landed is not for u...u can argue until the cow come home...end of the day, it is just not for u.
Why ppl buy conti car when we all know in general, maintenance for Jap car are cheaper? Try doing a normal servicing of an Audi 1.8 and a Toyota 1.8, if u have own both before, u will know what I mean.
Why ppl still buy LV bags when we all know it is just a bag?
Something that u valued might not be of value to another person. So, like it or not, just accept and move on.
:2cents:
of u referring to routine maintenance. The cost of an Audi is cheaper.
If u refer to usal wear and tear , brakes pads are abut the same price.
Please note comparison based on buying parts and service at suitable qualified workshop that has the tools to reset stuff.
Thanks to Ringo33 and Equalizer, I now have another fact to post.
4. Landed buyers tend to buy for their own stay (the current percentage is 86% of total landed stock based on latest figures supplied by Ringo33 and clarified by equalizer in link below ):
http://forums.condosingapore.com/showthread.php?p=396322#post396322
Just to update on some interesting recent landed transactions :
Dist 28 Jalan Kayu area is almost hitting $2Kpsf :
Date
2013-04-29, 5 JALAN TARI ZAPIN, 999 YRS FROM 1879, TERRACE, 1,249sf $2,488,800, $1,995psf
Date
2013-01-14, 7 JALAN TARI ZAPIN, 999 YRS FROM 1879, TERRACE, 1,270sf, $2,350,000, $1,856psf
D.23 Cashew terrace done at $1,742psf
Date
2013-05-07
CASHEW VILLAS, 174 CASHEW CRESCENT, D.23, 999 YRS FROM 1883, TERRACE, 2,153sf, $3,750,000, $1,742psf
D.10 Fernhill detached done at $1,982psf
Date
2013-05-10 , 1 FERNHILL CRESCENT, D.10, FREEHOLD, DETACHED, 9,085sf, $18,000,000, $1,982psf
Do you own the construction company? $500k for a rebuild? In your dreams?
Oh Its possible.... You meant buying a single storey IT and rebuilding it as a brand new single storey. Smart move pal.
I own a construction company. If u tear down a single sty 1800sf terrace n rebuilt into 3 sty. Min net cost 700k - 900k depending on site condition n type of finishes.
How about the same work for a 3000sf semi-D?
I own a construction company. If u tear down a single sty 1800sf terrace n rebuilt into 3 sty. Min net cost 700k - 900k depending on site condition n type of finishes.
I own a construction company. If u tear down a single sty 1800sf terrace n rebuilt into 3 sty. Min net cost 700k - 900k depending on site condition n type of
I saw this corner terrace house. Huge garden. Can introduce a small pool to it. How much would it cost to add a pool?
Just to update on some interesting recent landed transactions :
Dist 28 Jalan Kayu area is almost hitting $2Kpsf :
Date
2013-04-29, 5 JALAN TARI ZAPIN, 999 YRS FROM 1879, TERRACE, 1,249sf $2,488,800, $1,995psf
Date
2013-01-14, 7 JALAN TARI ZAPIN, 999 YRS FROM 1879, TERRACE, 1,270sf, $2,350,000, $1,856psf
I will say good luck to them. New highway next to them. That's y the previous owners decided to sell.
How about the same work for a 3000sf semi-D?
go to this forum http://www.renotalk.com/forum/forum/5-private-properties/. you will have an idea.
FACTS about landed property is here
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/800x600q90/690/esb7.jpg
This demonstrates the holding power of landed owners during the crash of 1997. SLIGHTLY MORE THAN 96% of landed owners did not need to sell off their landed properties at distress prices during the crash of 1997. Some people like to use the phrase that you cannot never enjoy your paper profit unless you sell. Conversely, you will never suffer a loss unless you are forced to dispose of your property.
Some folks will then try to come up with a silly postulation that the holding power was much greater in 1997 than now. Back then, the LTV was capped at 80% in 1996. Right now, the measures can cap you from 50% to as low as 20% if you buy > 1 property. Plus interest rates are at a low and expected to stay that way. Are the banks less or more like to call on your loans now than in 1997?
Holding power? This time is different??
Two Things Are Infinite: the Universe and Human Stupidity
LOL!!!
Holding power? This time is different??
Two Things Are Infinite: the Universe and Human Stupidity
LOL!!!
I don't know about human Stupidity but I don't think the universe is infinite right? At least not from a scientific point of view I think.
Allthepies
25-01-14, 16:12
I don't know about human Stupidity but I don't think the universe is infinite right? At least not from a scientific point of view I think.
Very difficult to visualise our universe as non-infinite because u will start to think what is outside our universe.....
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.