KATONG REGENCY 70% SOLD AT AVERAGE $1600psf

[phantom_opera]

they even have this:

[ekl2ekl2]

Don't think CM6 will come so soon.

Properties prices are relatively stable now plus minus few percentage points.
New sales may push prices up a little bit but resales are slightly down so all even out.

SH in Bishan probably a once off for now and other new launches in OCR very difficult to match or set new landmark prices.

[phantom_opera]

Nope nope ... even resale asking price is already up one notch ... it is what we call the Sky Habitat Effect ... or Katong Regency Effect

[hyenergix]

I believe many who buy 1 or 2 bedders n pushing up e psf of new launches r investors. CM is quite likely soon.

[insigina]

I believe many who buy 1 or 2 bedders n pushing up e psf of new launches r investors. CM is quite likely soon.

My Paper today says analysts believe CM could come in 4 to 6 weeks. They speculated that the target are investment units in the form of higher taxes for second and third property owners.

[Arcachon]

Frankly i am curious what would happen when interest raise in 2 yrs time in 2014. say go back to 3-4%.. how many people can sustain such interest payment.

When the tide goes out... how many naked people will be exposed?

Who will buy HDB S$12,000,000,000 MULTICURRENCY MEDIUM TERM NOTE PROGRAMME if say interest raise in 2 yrs time in 2014. say go back to 3-4%..

Maybe can ask the guy who buy from HDB.

It so easy to print money now. No ink require, all electron and protron.

http://info.sgx.com/listprosp.nsf/52...t=30&Expand=80

[Arcachon]

http://www.hdb.gov.sg/fi10/fi10296p....9?OpenDocument


S$360 million 5-year Fixed Rate Notes (the “Notes”) with a coupon of 1.165% per annum payable semi-annually in arrear. The Notes were issued on 24 April 2012 and will mature on 24 April 2017.
S$800 million 10-year Fixed Rate Notes (the “Notes”) with a coupon of 2.185% per annum payable semi-annually in arrear. The Notes were issued on 25 April 2012 and will mature on 25 April 2022.

I don't understand how can interest raise when someone buy the above, anyone can give any idea how it work.

[Leeds]

Fed Raises Economic Outlook, Leans Toward 2014 Hike


Published: Wednesday, 25 Apr 2012 | 2:07 PM ET



The Federal Reserve has boosted its outlook for U.S. economic growth this year and is slightly more optimistic about the unemployment rate, reflecting improvements in recent months.

In an updated forecast Wednesday, the Fed predicts the economy will grow between 2.4 percent and 2.9 percent in 2012. That compares with its forecast in January, when it estimated growth this year between 2.2 percent and 2.7 percent.
The Fed is estimating that unemployment, now at a three-year low of 8.2 percent, will be between 7.8 percent and 8 percent at year's end.
Its prediction for inflation is slightly higher but remains below its 2 percent target. And 11 Fed officials expect the first interest rate hike will not occur until 2014 or later, the same number who said so in January.
But the statement was a bit more hawkish in sentiment, with seven Open Market Committee members seeing a rate hike in 2014.
The forecast is critical in that it is indicative of whether the Fed will take on a third round of quantitative easing measures to boost the economy. An improving economy would suggest that QE3 is not imminent, though Chairman Ben Bernanke reiterated that the central bank is keeping its options open.

[amk]

I don't understand how can interest raise when someone buy the above, anyone can give any idea how it work.

... err exactly which part you are puzzled .. ? why can HDB borrow 10y SGD at 2.185% ?

[DKSG]

My Paper today says analysts believe CM could come in 4 to 6 weeks. They speculated that the target are investment units in the form of higher taxes for second and third property owners.

Are these the same "analysts" that says the previous CM will result in the market correcting 30% over 6 months ?
If they are the same "analysts", I think its time they stop calling them analysts, just refer to them as "someone".

DKSG
PS : I more analyst than them!

[phantom_opera]

http://www.hdb.gov.sg/fi10/fi10296p....9?OpenDocument


S$360 million 5-year Fixed Rate Notes (the “Notes”) with a coupon of 1.165% per annum payable semi-annually in arrear. The Notes were issued on 24 April 2012 and will mature on 24 April 2017.
S$800 million 10-year Fixed Rate Notes (the “Notes”) with a coupon of 2.185% per annum payable semi-annually in arrear. The Notes were issued on 25 April 2012 and will mature on 25 April 2022.

I don't understand how can interest raise when someone buy the above, anyone can give any idea how it work.

Simple ... market does not expect interest rate to go much higher above 2.2% in 10y time on average

[DKSG]

Simple ... market does not expect interest rate to go much higher above 2.2% in 10y time on average

That is great news for property investors!

[darkseid]

That is great news for property investors!

Should we take up fix interest or variable interest for housing loan?

[phantom_opera]

We are doomed to have huge property bubble over the next 10y because our financial system pegging our bank interest rate to US Fed rate ... we can only use exchange rate to fight inflation yet we are afraid of losing competitiveness

The guys in MAS / MTI know it ... but yet they allow COE to go much higher, REITs to buy even more malls and reserve price for GLS to go even higher

The famous saying goes ... it is very hard to tame inflation expectation unless or until the rich gets hurt by hyperinflation

The rich-poor divide will get wider and wider as middle class not able to invest in property due to 60% LTV but yet facing high inflation of 8% every year ... and they probably never will

[phantom_opera]

Might as well buy TIPS instead of HDB fixed rate bond ...

[insigina]

We are doomed to have huge property bubble over the next 10y because our financial system pegging our bank interest rate to US Fed rate ... we can only use exchange rate to fight inflation yet we are afraid of losing competitiveness

The guys in MAS / MTI know it ... but yet they allow COE to go much higher, REITs to buy even more malls and reserve price for GLS to go even higher

The famous saying goes ... it is very hard to tame inflation expectation unless or until the rich gets hurt by hyperinflation

The rich-poor divide will get wider and wider as middle class not able to invest in property due to 60% LTV but yet facing high inflation of 8% every year ... and they probably never will

The move that clearly demonstrated the govt's singular objective to attain high reserve price was when UOL's paya lebar bid was rejected. The govt had this golden opportunity to signal to the market that land prices should not rise too much and should be moderated. Instead, they rejected the bid. The message they sent to the market had the effect that there is more upside to prices and all GLS must chiong ahhhhh

[DKSG]

The move that clearly demonstrated the govt's singular objective to attain high reserve price was when UOL's paya lebar bid was rejected. The govt had this golden opportunity to signal to the market that land prices should not rise too much and should be moderated. Instead, they rejected the bid. The message they sent to the market had the effect that there is more upside to prices and all GLS must chiong ahhhhh

It is in the govt interest to maintain a stable and healthy property market with a bias towards gradual appreciation.

All agree right ?

DKSG

[eng81157]

It is in the govt interest to maintain a stable and healthy property market with a bias towards gradual appreciation.

All agree right ?

DKSG

In spirit, yes. However, the rejection of UOL's low bid and the ever-escalating new BTO prices just send out conflicting signals.

I think we are just being milked while the sun is still up.

[Leeds]

In spirit, yes. However, the rejection of UOL's low bid and the ever-escalating new BTO prices just send out conflicting signals.

I think we are just being milked while the sun is still up.

The rejection of UOL's bid was more so because there was no competitive bids to compare and it went against the government's standard operating procedures if URA would award it to UOL. If there had been two more bids lower than UOL, I am quite sure URA would have accepted the bid put forth by UOL.

[gn108]

Uncle Wee never buy kopi la ...unlike Uncle Liew ...

The rejection of UOL's bid was more so because there was no competitive bids to compare and it went against the government's standard operating procedures if URA would award it to UOL. If there had been two more bids lower than UOL, I am quite sure URA would have accepted the bid put forth by UOL.

[eng81157]

The rejection of UOL's bid was more so because there was no competitive bids to compare and it went against the government's standard operating procedures if URA would award it to UOL. If there had been two more bids lower than UOL, I am quite sure URA would have accepted the bid put forth by UOL.

my memory may be failing but that isn't the reason put forth by the government.

"The Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) has rejected the only bid submitted by the subsidiaries of UOL Group and Singapore Land for a
commercial site at Sims Avenue / Tanjong Katong Road because the price is too low.

UOL Venture Investments and SL Development had submitted a joint bid of S$529.3 million, or about S$566 psf per plot ratio, for the 99-year leasehold site. “We are very disappointed that the tender has
not been awarded. We were looking forward to a constructive role in the Government’s long-term plan to decentralise commercial activities outside of CBD which will help ease business costs, reduce undue congestion and revitalise urban nodes,” the consortium said in a joint statement. “The rejection is a setback to that decentralisation plan.” It said the bid had been a fair one considering “the site’s technical challenges and resultant impact on layout, as well as the recent global economic turbulences
and enhanced market risks”.

“The rejection came as a surprise to us … As price consideration was the only reason given for the rejection, it would be useful that for future land tenders, the reserve price be made known to the public as much cost
and effort are put into submissions of such a scale.’’
The bid for the 2.07-ha site closed on Oct 18. "

[insigina]

The rejection of UOL's bid was more so because there was no competitive bids to compare and it went against the government's standard operating procedures if URA would award it to UOL. If there had been two more bids lower than UOL, I am quite sure URA would have accepted the bid put forth by UOL.

This begs the question why were there no other bids??? My take is that there was a small window when market sentiment was directionless and it happened at the time of the paya lebar tender. This window of opportunity was a godsend. It gave the govt an opportunity to show hand on where they want the market to head. When they rejected the bid, the signal they sent is to chiong. This is one reason why we are in this high priced situation today. Had the govt accepted the bid and backed up with good reason, the market would be in a better controlled state today.

[gn108]

Brudder, cannot anyhow say.
In the same vein, cannot anyhow sell...

Top Spin is simple - "we cannot have a raid on our Reserves via this low bid".

Counter-Reverse Spin - "our bidding process is transparent and we will except the bid" or "taking in account the irregular feature of the plot, we accept that a lower bid is acceptable".

In this case, they went with Top Spin without explanantion...

This begs the question why were there no other bids??? My take is that there was a small window when market sentiment was directionless and it happened at the time of the paya lebar tender. This window of opportunity was a godsend. It gave the govt an opportunity to show hand on where they want the market to head. When they rejected the bid, the signal they sent is to chiong. This is one reason why we are in this high priced situation today. Had the govt accepted the bid and backed up with good reason, the market would be in a better controlled state today.

[Leeds]

This begs the question why were there no other bids??? My take is that there was a small window when market sentiment was directionless and it happened at the time of the paya lebar tender. This window of opportunity was a godsend. It gave the govt an opportunity to show hand on where they want the market to head. When they rejected the bid, the signal they sent is to chiong. This is one reason why we are in this high priced situation today. Had the govt accepted the bid and backed up with good reason, the market would be in a better controlled state today.

Whatever the official reason might be, it would not be right to award to the sole bidder. URA would not be able to answer to the AG during the annual audit. If I were one of the bid evaluator, I would not dare to recommend for award with only one bid unless the TOP said so. Who in URA (at the Top) would want to do that?

[Laguna]

The question is, whether the bid is above or under the reserved price.

[insigina]

Whatever the official reason might be, it would not be right to award to the sole bidder. URA would not be able to answer to the AG during the annual audit. If I were one of the bid evaluator, I would not dare to recommend for award with only one bid unless the TOP said so. Who in URA (at the Top) would want to do that?

To the lay person, when you have an open tender, and there is only one bid, its speaks about the market, eg; if tomorrow coe crash to $1, the govt also accept. Why not in this case. Anyway not vested

[insigina]

The question is, whether the bid is above or under the reserved price.

At the rate the market is moving, a reserved price can be dated very quickly.

[Leeds]

The question is, whether the bid is above or under the reserved price.

This site was not under the list where URA would call for a tender as long as any developer agreed to bid above the reserved price., so the reserved price concept did not apply for this case.

It was also not prudent to base on the Chief Valuer's only valued price as the reserved price. Perhaps, and indeed the bid was below the Chief Valuer's valued price which was not disclosed. Perhaps, there was no indicative price at all by the Chief Valuer. URA has been silence on this aspect.

[eng81157]

This site was not under the list where URA would call for a tender as long as any developer agreed to bid above the reserved price., so the reserved price concept did not apply for this case.

It was also not prudent to base on the Chief Valuer's only valued price as the reserved price. Perhaps, and indeed the bid was below the Chief Valuer's valued price which was not disclosed. Perhaps, there was no indicative price at all by the Chief Valuer. URA has been silence on this aspect.

so, your point being?! if the bid was above reserved price (which should be taken at market value), i won't have any doubt that it will be welcomed with arms wide open. this issue is not about procedural justice but the symbolic meaning of rejecting a low bid.

we have a govt that's saying property prices are running away, and it's a known fact that land costs is a major contributing factor. By refusing to temper it's expectations, it instead puts together a statement that gives conflicting signals. to me, it is plain hypocrisy.

to use another easier example - HDB. Why on earth is a new 4-room BTO going at more than $500k nowadays? Did the cost of cement skyrocketed stratospherically? It's the cost of land and guess who owns & values the land?

[gn108]

Hey that's my Reserves you talking about...we don't want to end up like those American native Indians and lose their land to the pale-face people.

BTO, DBSS or 99LH condo land is all our Reserves...cannot anyhow sell away.

so, your point being?! if the bid was above reserved price (which should be taken at market value), i won't have any doubt that it will be welcomed with arms wide open. this issue is not about procedural justice but the symbolic meaning of rejecting a low bid.

we have a govt that's saying property prices are running away, and it's a known fact that land costs is a major contributing factor. By refusing to temper it's expectations, it instead puts together a statement that gives conflicting signals. to me, it is plain hypocrisy.

to use another easier example - HDB. Why on earth is a new 4-room BTO going at more than $500k nowadays? Did the cost of cement skyrocketed stratospherically? It's the cost of land and guess who owns & values the land?