Actually he has a point lah... If tenure is the only consideration, Freehold would win of course.
However, when people buy properties, aside from tenure, also have to consider many other factors such as:
- Location
- Facilities
- Amenities
- Price
- etc
So the buyers will make their own trade-offs and choose accordingly. Each has their own market segments and customer base.
There you go.... you just replied, King Troll!
You just replied to me but NO BALLS to give your opinion on below?
Is below a trick question? Or you are a wussy pussy bear who doesn't know how to analyse?
If you dun know how to analyse or simply NO BALLS to give an answer, I will accept that coz you are just a TWIT!
I like to hear his expert opinion and which investment would he choose?
Case 1: LH balance 95 years
Price: $1m
Rental: $36,000 per year for 95 years with zero value at end of 99 years (assuming net rental)
Case 2: FH
Price: $1.2m (say $0.2m higher than LH)
Rental: same at $36,000 per year forever (assuming net rental)
Yes bro, that's why people like you in this forum is contributing with valuable comments which makes a forum a lively place to read and learn.
Since that teddybear likes to talk about LH vs FH only and spreading his shit, I gave him a simple example but he has no balls to reply.
So I just want the other forummers to know that he is not only a clock with no hands but also someone who is a twit and a troll with 10k+ posts.
He is like an expert in financials but then no balls to reply on my simple example.
Case study for analysis:
https://www.google.com.sg/amp/s/kopi...this-year/amp/
Got 20% premium or only about 4% above new LH99 land price?
You be the judge.
The three laws of Kelonguni:
Where there is kelong, there is guni.
No kelong no guni.
More kelong = more guni.
of course FH better lor.
thank you for pointing it out.
what LH99 land price is used for comparison?
if compare with one tree hill mansion,
from URA data, 99LH from 1973 (55 years remaining).
ONE TREE HILL MANSIONS 1,440,000 - 1,615 Strata 11 to 15 892 Mar-17
ONE TREE HILL MANSIONS 1,400,000 - 1,625 Strata 11 to 15 861 Jul-16
ONE TREE HILL MANSIONS 1,630,000 - 1,615 Strata 01 to 05 1,010 Feb-15
ONE TREE HILL MANSIONS 1,700,000 - 1,615 Strata 11 to 15 1,053 Sep-14
seems to be like one tree hill gardens seems to be getting a good deal ($1664psf) compare to one tree hill mansions (~$890psf).
will watch whether one tree hill mansions will be enbloc.
by the way, is it a right comparison between one tree hill mansions vs one tree hill gardens?
Last edited by hopeful; 09-05-17 at 11:44.
like right we will have 1 (<10 years old) FH vs 1 new LH, back to back.
Martin Place Residence (MPR) vs Martin Modern (MM).
indicative prices say MM will be priced at higher psf than MPR.
if MM psf > MPR psf, who would buy MM ?
or would MPR price rise to match that of MM ?
People buying 99-years leasehold properties dreaming of en bloc should just wake up to reality, like this 99-years leasehold property en bloc deal!
Because of the lease running down, the properties are only en bloc at $518 psf ppr!
Read this news:
Oxley-led consortium secures Rio Casa for $518 psf ppr in en bloc deal
A CONSORTIUM comprising Oxley Holdings, KSH Holdings, Lian Beng Group and the private investment firm of Super Group's Teo family has secured a residential property in Hougang for S$575 million.
The property known as Rio Casa is a former HUDC estate that has been privatised and sits on a land area of about 36,811.1 square metres.
ted differential premium of S$208 million is payable to the state for the top-up of the lease and for the development of the site to a gross plot ratio of 2.8.
According to this article http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/...c-deal-8883450, each owner stands to receive about $2 million for their unit.
The units are all above 1600 sq ft so didn't they get paid more than $1000 psf ?
Oxley very busy eh these days.
575m is a good price for that site. Dont think the owners of the enbloc units are complaining much.
I think it's a reasonable deal for their ageing property. The older rio casa , as is common for older properties, have less intensified usage of the land area. The new development GPR is increased to 2.8, so expect a lot more units based on increased GFA.
add in construction cost and misc cost to the 518psf GFA, the launch price for the new development is likely above 1000psf even for larger units. Hope oxley don't do their thing and flood hougang with hundreds of MM units.
Last edited by tonymontana; 26-05-17 at 07:58.
If you buy something for less than half a million, live in there for close to half a century, and have it sold for 3 times or more the price you paid, in part because of increased plot ratio, why do you care whether the site is leasehold or freehold?
This is one perfect example Teddy.
The three laws of Kelonguni:
Where there is kelong, there is guni.
No kelong no guni.
More kelong = more guni.
The other forumer has already answered your question:- because of plot ratio increase!
In terms of actual price based on $PSF PPR (based on new plot ratio), it is indeed only $518 psf ppr! That is the most important thing that developer considers, not how much each owner will get.
People would have to think whether their properties would have their plot ratio increased by the government, particularly when most new 99-years leasehold estates are now having plot ratio of 2.1 or more (and more commonly 2.8 as in this case)?
Rio Casa was completed in 1986.
Assuming an initial lump sum purchase payment of $400,000 in 1986.
The PV of $400,000 based on 2.5% compounding is about $850,000. This is the figure for normal incremental of asset value.
But I doubt that it was $400,000, which could buy much better ones in 1986.
There were 6 sales transacted last year, congratulations to the lucky six. Too bad for those who just sold.
The government has stop increasing plot ratio for land where private property now sit so as to prevent owners getting a windfall without any effort. The government only increases the plot ratio on vacant land and HDB's land via SER and where HDB flats now sit. Developer who acquire private land via en bloc will still be subject to its existing plot ratio. However, the developer can after acquiring the land apply for higher plot ratio if the neighboring plots have higher plot ratio by paying the differential premium.
Why not relevant?
If the property is a freehold, then the owners will get about $783 MILLIONS (and not $575M)!
The owner will get paid $705 psf ppr for the properties!
That is, they will get 36% MORE! (=(705-518)/518)
And this is just yester-year!
In future, all newer 99-years leasehold properties will not get en bloc anymore because government is NOT going to increase your plot ratio any more! Fat hope of en bloc and cashing out before their properties lease run out and their 99-years leasehold property value goes to $ZERO!
Good attempt. At 36% higher price tag developers won't buy.
Govt will not set plot ratio higher but will have to change max plot ratio to allow developers the option to increase plot ratio.
Don't listen to the rubbish about Govt not increasing plot ratio. If surrounding similar purpose plots increase in plot ratio, the vicinity's max increases as well.
Else how to renew buildings in SG?
The three laws of Kelonguni:
Where there is kelong, there is guni.
No kelong no guni.
More kelong = more guni.
Land scarcity is actualy a myth. Gov has enough reserved lands to easily accomodate 7 millions. Not to mention current building heights here probably only half of those in HK.
The only time the government increased the plot ratio while the private property was still standing was for the land around Butterworth area along Tanjong Katong Road. There were then mostly landed properties. In order to motivate the landed owners to move, the government increased the plot ratio while the landed owners were still residing. There was no reason for these owners not to sell collectively then. The government did that because of the need to develop Paya Lebar regional centre, hence these landed properties had to go.
Other than the land Butterworth area, the government has not increased plot ratio for land where private property still standing.
But the sellers do factor in the potential for increased land use intensity if developers bite and apply.
Another example is Pearl apartments, can apply to increase land use intensity.
Ultimately, the Govt has to encourage increased plot ratio everywhere, beginning with the low plot areas.
Currently, there is a GCB area being sold and application made to convert to strata. The price factors in the potential for success in increasing plot ratio. No developer will bite if it's ratio cannot be confidently projected at their target price and intensity. In other words, the application should have some kind of approval for increased land use potential before the developer agrees to buy. This is different in principle to increasing plot ratio when building is standing, but in reality, it reserves the potential to profit for the owners and not new buyers.
The three laws of Kelonguni:
Where there is kelong, there is guni.
No kelong no guni.
More kelong = more guni.
Look beyond the 7 mil in 2030. Plans are probably in progress for 10 mil by 2050.
Open eyes and see how intensely they are building developments along expressways and expanding roads...
Infrastructural competency before population increase. Not a matter of if, but when.
The three laws of Kelonguni:
Where there is kelong, there is guni.
No kelong no guni.
More kelong = more guni.