View Poll Results: Bull or Bear

Voters
75. You may not vote on this poll
  • Bullish

    38 50.67%
  • Bearish

    37 49.33%
Page 26 of 61 FirstFirst ... 6111621222324252627282930313641465156 ... LastLast
Results 751 to 780 of 1809

Thread: Property market sentiments?

  1. #751
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    5,837

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by teddybear
    Talk about the glassy buildings; Developers want you to believe that they are putting so much glasses on the exterior of your condo unit because it looks classy (glassy?) and modern but the real reason why they like it is because those glass they use are damn cheap compared to using concrete! Mind you, I am also damn sure that such condo unit cannot last as long as those using concrete without requiring more maintenance/replacement as the glass cracks when they aged or because of impurities in them etc.
    in december 2006 Indonesia banned the sale of sand to spore ..resulted in a spike in construction cost ..

    it used to cost something like 100-140 psf to build ..it spike to 280 psf at one stage. .

    then govt encourage use of steel and glass ..

    that resulted in an era of glass wall in most new condo .. which is cheaper than concrete ..

    so has construction cost come down ? yes it has ..
    but has developers pass the reduced cost to buyers ? NO

    so who is really making money ?

    i think we have totally forgotten about this issue

    as i am aware, a company in asia is making glass, tempered, bullet proof, able to reduce heat and UV ..and cheaper than the current bullet proof glass patented in USA ..

    in time to come, homes can be built using this glass ...much much better than what we have today ..

  2. #752
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    5,837

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jitkiat
    THE recent exuberance in Singapore's property market could see prices creeping up some five to 10 per cent by end of this year and into the next, said CapitaLand's chief executive Liew Mun Leong on Thursday.
    At the moment, the demand from homes is in a 'healthy state' and it does not appear there is bubble forming yet, said Mr Liew.


    => he will will launch Gillman Height soon ...guess earliest November ... AMK 1150psf ... Alexandra will set you back @ 1400psf then, their enbloc cost is below 400psf

    didnt capital land report a loss ???

    people dont be fooled by him

    position talk ..sell high high in spore ..make the money to cover the loss in australia

  3. #753
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default

    Unfortunately if you go to see all those glassy condos, you will see that their glass used are the plain normal thin glass that when you knock you can hear echo (so sure is cheap-skate type that can break easily).

    Quote Originally Posted by proud owner
    in december 2006 Indonesia banned the sale of sand to spore ..resulted in a spike in construction cost ..

    it used to cost something like 100-140 psf to build ..it spike to 280 psf at one stage. .

    then govt encourage use of steel and glass ..

    that resulted in an era of glass wall in most new condo .. which is cheaper than concrete ..

    so has construction cost come down ? yes it has ..
    but has developers pass the reduced cost to buyers ? NO

    so who is really making money ?

    i think we have totally forgotten about this issue

    as i am aware, a company in asia is making glass, tempered, bullet proof, able to reduce heat and UV ..and cheaper than the current bullet proof glass patented in USA ..

    in time to come, homes can be built using this glass ...much much better than what we have today ..

  4. #754
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EBD
    Not a good analogy.

    1. Some companies disappear because they go out of business.
    2. Some however split up into new entities...... Has your investment disappeared?
    3. Some companies vanish as they are eaten by other companies...... do you not get stock in the new company?

    Who in their right mind would but all their eggs in one basket. Diversify & avoid situation 1 with ETF and mutual fund.

    by the same strange logic lets think of an analogy for 2 & 3....
    Do you think the property Sussana received in London is still standing today? Oh if it's not there anymore then she must have lost everything right? No chance she got fair market price for it from developer etc.....
    I used to have a nice property down Leonie Hill. It's no longer there. I guess I am severely out of pocket... transferred my wealth to ..... whoever I am meant to have transferred it to.

    Are you still so sure about property & stock?

    I use both & have more in equity and bonds than property as you can pull the trigger real quick if you need to.
    Companies, like humans, have a life expectancy.

    According to BusinessWeek, "The average life expectancy of a multinational corporation-Fortune 500 or its equivalent-is between 40 and 50 years".

    Some, like Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns, lived to ripe old age of 158 and 85 years respectively but others, like the dot-com companies, did not survive infancy.

    Nevertheless, the average life expectancy of a company is shorter than the average human life expectancy of 75 to 80 years.

    Therefore, a human being should not invest in something which is expected to have a shorter lifespan than himself or herself.

    That is, unfortunately, what a lot of retirees and pension funds are just beginning to find out to their despair.

    In a way, companies are like human beings, they are born, grow, mature, decline and then die.

    The people who make the most money out of stocks are those who invested during the birth or growth phases. These are the founder entrepreneurs, angel investors and venture capitalists.

    The moment the companies are public listed, they have reached adulthood. It is not worth investing because then I would be investing into their decline and eventual death.

    Of course some companies perform well after IPO, e.g. Google, Microsoft, but I won't want to touch them with a ten-foot pole.

    When companies collapse, they do so suddenly.

    The effect of digital cameras caused Kodak's share price to plunge from a high of USD 76 in 1999 to USD 3 today.

    A company that is doing well does not need to be acquired. Even if a declining company does not go out of business but gets acquired, how much worth of new stocks do you think you will get from a company which acquires Kodak now that is is worth only USD 3 per share?

    On the other hand, the hypothetical Sussana would have been very rich if she had held on to her properties in central London for her descendants. She should not sell it to developers even if it is at "fair market price" during that time, or whatever time. Whatever "fair market price" you get from developers will never be fair a few decades down the road, not to mention centuries.

  5. #755
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    maybe susanne would have been forced into some ancient version of an en-bloc when 80% of the residents in her area voted for it after 30 years...hahaha...life expectancy even lower than some companies...

    Quote Originally Posted by jlrx
    Companies, like humans, have a life expectancy.

    According to BusinessWeek, "The average life expectancy of a multinational corporation-Fortune 500 or its equivalent-is between 40 and 50 years".

    Some, like Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns, lived to ripe old age of 158 and 85 years respectively but others, like the dot-com companies, did not survive infancy.

    Nevertheless, the average life expectancy of a company is shorter than the average human life expectancy of 75 to 80 years.

    Therefore, a human being should not invest in something which is expected to have a shorter lifespan than himself or herself.

    That is, unfortunately, what a lot of retirees and pension funds are just beginning to find out to their despair.

    In a way, companies are like human beings, they are born, grow, mature, decline and then die.

    The people who make the most money out of stocks are those who invested during the birth or growth phases. These are the founder entrepreneurs, angel investors and venture capitalists.

    The moment the companies are public listed, they have reached adulthood. It is not worth investing because then I would be investing into their decline and eventual death.

    Of course some companies perform well after IPO, e.g. Google, Microsoft, but I won't want to touch them with a ten-foot pole.

    When companies collapse, they do so suddenly.

    The effect of digital cameras caused Kodak's share price to plunge from a high of USD 76 in 1999 to USD 3 today.

    A company that is doing well does not need to be acquired. Even if a declining company does not go out of business but gets acquired, how much worth of new stocks do you think you will get from a company which acquires Kodak now that is is worth only USD 3 per share?

    On the other hand, the hypothetical Sussana would have been very rich if she had held on to her properties in central London for her descendants. She should not sell it to developers even if it is at "fair market price" during that time, or whatever time. Whatever "fair market price" you get from developers will never be fair a few decades down the road, not to mention centuries.

  6. #756
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bargain hunter
    maybe susanne would have been forced into some ancient version of an en-bloc when 80% of the residents in her area voted for it after 30 years...hahaha...life expectancy even lower than some companies...
    If your property is en-bloced then quickly buy another property.

    Hence if the hypothetical Sussana Shakespeare's property was enbloced and she quickly bought another property in central London, she should be fine.

    If she had kept the en bloc money in the bank, then her descendants might still have some money left, though not much after adjusting for inflation.

    However, if she had used the en bloc money to buy shares in companies that existed during her time instead, I don't think her descendants would have any money left today.

    However, the heiress of the Windows Grill company which sold her shares, Sussana Gates, would be very rich and staying at Kensington Palace Gardens.
    Last edited by jlrx; 31-07-09 at 02:54.

  7. #757
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    same what, some companies are not there because they were acquired/merged as EBD had pointed out, not because they closed down.

    Quote Originally Posted by jlrx
    If your property is en-bloced then quickly buy another property.

    Hence if the hypothetical Sussana Shakespeare's property was enbloced and she quickly bought another property in central London, she should be fine.

    If she had kept the en bloc money in the bank, then her descendants might still have some money left, though not much after adjusting for inflation.

    However, if she had used the en bloc money to buy shares in companies that existed during her time instead, I don't think her descendants would have any money left today.

    However, the heiress of the Windows Grill company which sold her shares, Sussana Gates, would be very rich and staying at Kensington Palace Gardens.

  8. #758
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    637

    Default

    I think you have totally missed the point I was making.

    I agree companies don't last forever. but they generally dont just disappear into thin air either. They are bought & merged more often than they go bankrupt. So value is retained, even if only $3.

    However if you are foolish enough to invest only in a single company, this can happen. Even worse if you never pick up a newspaper and keep up to date on how the world changes.
    I would never buy just one stock. Especially as ETF's are so easy to buy these days. Since I have bought STI ETF two developers have been pushed out of the STI.... does this mean I lost money? Of course not, the ETF manager had to sell that stock and but the new companies added. But why focus on just Singapore. You can easily grab a piece of the action around the world and not expose yourself to just one market. Heck if you are obsessed with property there are REITS to choose that gives you exposure and a liquid exit.

    Also property has a life expectancy too. How many 400 year old buildings are kicking around London? Some but not many.
    As for never selling, you may have no choice. Maintenance in future may make it unaffordable for you to keep up with increasing costs.
    In Singapore especially enbloc means that life expectancy of buildings is below 50 yrs & you will have no choice in keeping it. As such you will never get to hang onto your property and as you suggested you will not be compensated at "fair value" a few years on.


    As we are talking hypotheticals how about this one.
    What if you bought freehold property on the Singapore River. What happens to its value in 50-100 years time. Should be up right? But what happens when the world changes and the old rules no longer apply. In 100years time Singapore could be part of Malaysian terratorial waters if some of the global warming models come to fruition. How much is your property now worth underwater.

    Interesting discussion.

    There's risk involved in all investment.
    The phrase as safe as houses is however a misnomer.


    Quote Originally Posted by jlrx
    Companies, like humans, have a life expectancy.

    According to BusinessWeek, "The average life expectancy of a multinational corporation-Fortune 500 or its equivalent-is between 40 and 50 years".

    Some, like Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns, lived to ripe old age of 158 and 85 years respectively but others, like the dot-com companies, did not survive infancy.

    Nevertheless, the average life expectancy of a company is shorter than the average human life expectancy of 75 to 80 years.

    Therefore, a human being should not invest in something which is expected to have a shorter lifespan than himself or herself.

    That is, unfortunately, what a lot of retirees and pension funds are just beginning to find out to their despair.

    In a way, companies are like human beings, they are born, grow, mature, decline and then die.

    The people who make the most money out of stocks are those who invested during the birth or growth phases. These are the founder entrepreneurs, angel investors and venture capitalists.

    The moment the companies are public listed, they have reached adulthood. It is not worth investing because then I would be investing into their decline and eventual death.

    Of course some companies perform well after IPO, e.g. Google, Microsoft, but I won't want to touch them with a ten-foot pole.

    When companies collapse, they do so suddenly.

    The effect of digital cameras caused Kodak's share price to plunge from a high of USD 76 in 1999 to USD 3 today.

    A company that is doing well does not need to be acquired. Even if a declining company does not go out of business but gets acquired, how much worth of new stocks do you think you will get from a company which acquires Kodak now that is is worth only USD 3 per share?

    On the other hand, the hypothetical Sussana would have been very rich if she had held on to her properties in central London for her descendants. She should not sell it to developers even if it is at "fair market price" during that time, or whatever time. Whatever "fair market price" you get from developers will never be fair a few decades down the road, not to mention centuries.

  9. #759
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EBD
    I
    What happens to its value in 50-100 years time. Should be up right? But what happens when the world changes and the old rules no longer apply. In 100years time Singapore could be part of Malaysian terratorial waters if some of the global warming models come to fruition. How much is your property now worth underwater.
    Dun have to wait that long, 21th Dec 2012 will know already.

  10. #760
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    637

    Default

    The problem here is that if you do that you're new apartment will more likely cost more and be smaller than your old one, unless you buy a less attractive location. Not many people really benefit from enbloc.
    Either way you're property holdings are losing value relative to what you had.
    Especially with stamp duty, legal fees etc... added into the equation. At least 3+% straight away has vanished.

    Again you make the assumption that someone would be passively invested in stocks, buy hold & forget. In that case you would wake up one day and find your kodak stock = $3, but how many couldn't see digital cameras taking over. I would have sold, not at the peak I'm not that good - but I wouldn't be holding at $3.

    So here's a good question. Say you have 1 million invested in the oil business - what is it worth in 50 years.

    Oil is running out
    Governments are getting hostile to carbon polluters
    Will oil companies go the way of the dinosaurs or will some transform to the market situation and thrive? Would you just passively sit back and not readjust your bets on a regular basis?


    Quote Originally Posted by jlrx
    If your property is en-bloced then quickly buy another property.

    Hence if the hypothetical Sussana Shakespeare's property was enbloced and she quickly bought another property in central London, she should be fine.

    If she had kept the en bloc money in the bank, then her descendants might still have some money left, though not much after adjusting for inflation.

    However, if she had used the en bloc money to buy shares in companies that existed during her time instead, I don't think her descendants would have any money left today.

    However, the heiress of the Windows Grill company which sold her shares, Sussana Gates, would be very rich and staying at Kensington Palace Gardens.

  11. #761
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Property_Owner
    Dun have to wait that long, 21th Dec 2012 will know already.


    The Mayan calendar. These guys couldn't even predict their own end.

  12. #762
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,841

    Default

    When i drive past that ugly piece of slab, my wife would comment why developer got no money to paint the building?

    Quote Originally Posted by august
    does retropolitan comes to mind?

  13. #763
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by proud owner
    when the shit about to hit the fence ..pretend to step down and hired some ang mo ..

    when the storm of the loss is over .. ang mo strangely resigned ...and she's back ??

    ahhahaha


    Fair Weather CEO like that no wonder top 10 woman in the world lah ..

    we should be happy we have someone we can be proud of ...
    What to do ? No other people can replace that hot job position lah

    juz like you know

  14. #764
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    5,837

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by qianfugui
    What to do ? No other people can replace that hot job position lah

    juz like you know

    she obviously is not a good horse

    cos Good horse dont eat 'turn head' grass

  15. #765
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by qianfugui
    What to do ? No other people can replace that hot job position lah

    juz like you know
    Hey, don't forget that guy that stay @ Carabelle

  16. #766
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,069

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Property_Owner
    Hey, don't forget that guy that stay @ Carabelle
    He shorted S&P500 at 800+ ..

  17. #767
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    49

    Default

    Wah.. the property market so hot now I think Dragon Mansion got chance to buy buyer liao ..

  18. #768
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EBD
    The problem here is that if you do that you're new apartment will more likely cost more and be smaller than your old one, unless you buy a less attractive location. Not many people really benefit from enbloc.
    Either way you're property holdings are losing value relative to what you had.
    Especially with stamp duty, legal fees etc... added into the equation. At least 3+% straight away has vanished.

    Again you make the assumption that someone would be passively invested in stocks, buy hold & forget. In that case you would wake up one day and find your kodak stock = $3, but how many couldn't see digital cameras taking over. I would have sold, not at the peak I'm not that good - but I wouldn't be holding at $3.

    So here's a good question. Say you have 1 million invested in the oil business - what is it worth in 50 years.

    Oil is running out
    Governments are getting hostile to carbon polluters
    Will oil companies go the way of the dinosaurs or will some transform to the market situation and thrive? Would you just passively sit back and not readjust your bets on a regular basis?
    Enbloc benefits are relative.

    For example, Farrer Court enblockers used to be heartland people who bought their HUDC flats at slightly higher price than HDBs, but after enbloc for $2.2 million they could move to a Newton apartment or semi-D in East Coast. They have upgraded.

    Similarly I used my en bloc money (not Farrer Court) to buy a landed house, although in a less attractive location, but relatively speaking I have move ahead.

    Regarding "passive investment" versus "active investment" ... my philosophy is that "active investment" is witchcraft. Simply, it will not work except on hindsight, just like lottery number prediction.

    My reasoning is very simple. Temasek Holdings and GIC hire the best people some of whom, according to MM Lee, are paid several times what he is paid (which is about $3 million a year). Hence these "investment experts" must be paid close to $10 million a year. I presume that people in this income bracket should be amongst the best in their field.

    Yet you can see that they: 1. Did not foresee this financial crisis coming; 2. Invested Temasek and GIC's money wrongly causing losses of $40 billion and $50 billion respectively.

    From this, I conclude that stock investment picking is witchcraft.

    Let me give you examples of professions that I consider to be witchcraft: 1. Lottery Prediction; 2. Fortune Telling; 3. Stock Investment Picking; 4. Witchcraft.

    Let me give you examples of professions that I DO NOT consider to be witchcraft: 1. Medicine; 2. Engineering; 3. Scientific Research.

    Let's talk about medicine. If a junior houseman is unable to detect an early stage cancerous polyp, I think it is excusable. But if you tell me that the top cancer surgeon in the country earning $10 million a year is unable to diagnose an end stage cancer, then I would consider medicine to be witchcraft. Which of course it is not. If you read top oncologist Dr. Ang Peng Thiam's weekly column in "Mind Your Body", he was able to smell some advanced patients' cancer the moment they walk into his room.

    Similarly, if you tell me that a junior stock analyst is unable to predict the collapse of Zimbabwe's stock market, I say that is excusable. But if you tell me that the foremost, highest paid "investment experts" of the land were unable to smell something as huge as this worldwide financial crisis coming, my only conclusion is that this whole discipline is witchcraft.

    Which of course is the only logical conclusion that one can make.

  19. #769
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    Then why is Warren Buffett the richest man on earth? Isn't he a stockpicker too?

    I do agree that those highly paid professionals are withcraft. I disagree with you in that I believe that there are a lot of people who just need commonsense to make good investors, need not be armed with high education or climb corporate ladder, just simple common sense.


    Quote Originally Posted by jlrx
    Enbloc benefits are relative.

    For example, Farrer Court enblockers used to be heartland people who bought their HUDC flats at slightly higher price than HDBs, but after enbloc for $2.2 million they could move to a Newton apartment or semi-D in East Coast. They have upgraded.

    Similarly I used my en bloc money (not Farrer Court) to buy a landed house, although in a less attractive location, but relatively speaking I have move ahead.

    Regarding "passive investment" versus "active investment" ... my philosophy is that "active investment" is witchcraft. Simply, it will not work except on hindsight, just like lottery number prediction.

    My reasoning is very simple. Temasek Holdings and GIC hire the best people some of whom, according to MM Lee, are paid several times what he is paid (which is about $3 million a year). Hence these "investment experts" must be paid close to $10 million a year. I presume that people in this income bracket should be amongst the best in their field.

    Yet you can see that they: 1. Did not foresee this financial crisis coming; 2. Invested Temasek and GIC's money wrongly causing losses of $40 billion and $50 billion respectively.

    From this, I conclude that stock investment picking is witchcraft.

    Let me give you examples of professions that I consider to be witchcraft: 1. Lottery Prediction; 2. Fortune Telling; 3. Stock Investment Picking; 4. Witchcraft.

    Let me give you examples of professions that I DO NOT consider to be witchcraft: 1. Medicine; 2. Engineering; 3. Scientific Research.

    Let's talk about medicine. If a junior houseman is unable to detect an early stage cancerous polyp, I think it is excusable. But if you tell me that the top cancer surgeon in the country earning $10 million a year is unable to diagnose an end stage cancer, then I would consider medicine to be witchcraft. Which of course it is not. If you read top oncologist Dr. Ang Peng Thiam's weekly column in "Mind Your Body", he was able to smell some advanced patients' cancer the moment they walk into his room.

    Similarly, if you tell me that a junior stock analyst is unable to predict the collapse of Zimbabwe's stock market, I say that is excusable. But if you tell me that the foremost, highest paid "investment experts" of the land were unable to smell something as huge as this worldwide financial crisis coming, my only conclusion is that this whole discipline is witchcraft.

    Which of course is the only logical conclusion that one can make.

  20. #770
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,841

    Default

    buffett is the richest man on earth because he is not motivated by greed when he starts investing.


    Quote Originally Posted by bargain hunter
    Then why is Warren Buffett the richest man on earth? Isn't he a stockpicker too?

    I do agree that those highly paid professionals are withcraft. I disagree with you in that I believe that there are a lot of people who just need commonsense to make good investors, need not be armed with high education or climb corporate ladder, just simple common sense.

  21. #771
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,069

    Default

    Off topic, interesting read:

    http://www.tradersnarrative.com/sp-5...html#more-2810

    Basically, it means S&P500 has more chance to go up from here since it is already 12% above 200d MA.

  22. #772
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    648

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bargain hunter
    Then why is Warren Buffett the richest man on earth? Isn't he a stockpicker too?

    I do agree that those highly paid professionals are withcraft. I disagree with you in that I believe that there are a lot of people who just need commonsense to make good investors, need not be armed with high education or climb corporate ladder, just simple common sense.
    common sense.. that is what making the long queue at optima.
    just kidding. mind sharing the common sense..?

  23. #773
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bargain hunter
    Then why is Warren Buffett the richest man on earth? Isn't he a stockpicker too?

    I do agree that those highly paid professionals are withcraft. I disagree with you in that I believe that there are a lot of people who just need commonsense to make good investors, need not be armed with high education or climb corporate ladder, just simple common sense.
    Have you heard of the experiment that a monkey throwing darts at a dart board can pick better stocks than most fund managers?

    Now the problem is that due to deforestation, the number of monkeys in the world has dropped to very much lower than the human population.

    Otherwise, give me 6,700,000,000 monkeys (equal to the world's human population) and I make them throw darts to select stocks, I am confident that the best performing monkey can equal Warren Buffett.

  24. #774
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    637

    Default

    The dart throwing monkey is an analogy and never actually happened.
    This is one of the most beloved urban legends of people who need an excuse for their poor luck.
    But the point the story is meant to make is generally true.

    Hence ETF. Don't beat the market, buy the market. Diversified and better yield than property.

    On a general note. Do you think all 6.7 billion humans are picking stocks? Is your comparison fair?



    Quote Originally Posted by jlrx
    Have you heard of the experiment that a monkey throwing darts at a dart board can pick better stocks than most fund managers?

    Now the problem is that due to deforestation, the number of monkeys in the world has dropped to very much lower than the human population.

    Otherwise, give me 6,700,000,000 monkeys (equal to the world's human population) and I make them throw darts to select stocks, I am confident that the best performing monkey can equal Warren Buffett.

  25. #775
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    Precisely, if the long queue at optima is to buy for own stay then that's fine. if they are buying for investment then that's not using common sense to make a good investment. I guess using common sense is to see what is a product/company which has a sustainable demand for its goods. Note, sustainable and hopefully non cyclical so that makes ppty stocks not investible stocks but certainly very tradeable .



    Quote Originally Posted by Douk
    common sense.. that is what making the long queue at optima.
    just kidding. mind sharing the common sense..?

  26. #776
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Regulators
    buffett is the richest man on earth because he is not motivated by greed when he starts investing.
    AGREE ... humble man until this age of his ... up till to this day

  27. #777
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    637

    Default

    "moving ahead in a less attractive location"
    The three rules of property - location, location, location.
    Are the new apartments at the same location more expensive than the landed? If so is it moving ahead?

    Again the assumption is that the people Temasek employ really are any good. We are told they are the elites.... best of the best. Performance is otherwise.
    Buffet just made 1 billion from BYD in less than 6 months. His bets on Goldman looked aweful 6 months ago. Now he looks like the genius he is.

    "Let me give you examples of professions that I consider to be witchcraft: 1. Lottery Prediction; 2. Fortune Telling; 3. Stock Investment Picking; 4. Witchcraft.

    Let me give you examples of professions that I DO NOT consider to be witchcraft: 1. Medicine; 2. Engineering; 3. Scientific Research."

    From my point of view I agree. I don't have the time to be doing this on a daily basis. Picking individual stocks is too risky for me, but there are simple ways to get good returns from the markets. And when I say not being passive I don't mean trying to pretend to be Buffet. Just look at how things are going around in general.

    After our enbloc the subprime was raging but had hardly blipped on local news. Somehow asia had magically decoupled the theory went. Prices here were soaring for homes still. I couldn't believe the party could continue from a fundemental point of view as decoupling was just not true.

    If I had simply dumped all my proceeds back into the property market I would have got a smaller unit in the same locale. Then watch it plunge 40% in 6-12 months.

    Instead we bought US$ bonds waiting to see how the situation in US and europe would play out. After watching the yield get obliterated as people ran to the US Bonds for safety and the prices go up we sold in Dec for a tidy profit & started buying wide baskets of funds and high yield bond funds.

    I just put down my 5% on a bigger apartment same location, nearly 40% off peak prices which is when our old apartment got taken from us.

    This is being active to me. & it is nerve wracking but proved far better than my previous philosophy of just dump into property alone and hope for the best. Maybe you can be dismiss me as just being lucky.
    At least I tried to take emotion out of it as much as possible.
    A colleague went to his Feng Shui master to get advice. He told him April will be a very bad month for the market. This I would agree is witchcraft. Amazingly he still agrees with his advice even though it is obviously BS and now beyond doubt.

    Just because Temasek are hopeless at picking doesn't therefore prove it to be witchcraft. They may just suck or like others knew how bad it was but were afraid to leave the party in case they got it wrong.
    Maybe they aren't as careful - OPM decisions are always easier..... if you get it wrong. Hey you still get bonuses in these "industries" for lousy performance.

    It's not the only logical conclusion you can make. It's just that it's your opinion & that's fine. Everyone should have one.


    Quote Originally Posted by jlrx
    Enbloc benefits are relative.

    For example, Farrer Court enblockers used to be heartland people who bought their HUDC flats at slightly higher price than HDBs, but after enbloc for $2.2 million they could move to a Newton apartment or semi-D in East Coast. They have upgraded.

    Similarly I used my en bloc money (not Farrer Court) to buy a landed house, although in a less attractive location, but relatively speaking I have move ahead.

    Regarding "passive investment" versus "active investment" ... my philosophy is that "active investment" is witchcraft. Simply, it will not work except on hindsight, just like lottery number prediction.

    My reasoning is very simple. Temasek Holdings and GIC hire the best people some of whom, according to MM Lee, are paid several times what he is paid (which is about $3 million a year). Hence these "investment experts" must be paid close to $10 million a year. I presume that people in this income bracket should be amongst the best in their field.

    Yet you can see that they: 1. Did not foresee this financial crisis coming; 2. Invested Temasek and GIC's money wrongly causing losses of $40 billion and $50 billion respectively.

    From this, I conclude that stock investment picking is witchcraft.

    Let me give you examples of professions that I consider to be witchcraft: 1. Lottery Prediction; 2. Fortune Telling; 3. Stock Investment Picking; 4. Witchcraft.

    Let me give you examples of professions that I DO NOT consider to be witchcraft: 1. Medicine; 2. Engineering; 3. Scientific Research.

    Let's talk about medicine. If a junior houseman is unable to detect an early stage cancerous polyp, I think it is excusable. But if you tell me that the top cancer surgeon in the country earning $10 million a year is unable to diagnose an end stage cancer, then I would consider medicine to be witchcraft. Which of course it is not. If you read top oncologist Dr. Ang Peng Thiam's weekly column in "Mind Your Body", he was able to smell some advanced patients' cancer the moment they walk into his room.

    Similarly, if you tell me that a junior stock analyst is unable to predict the collapse of Zimbabwe's stock market, I say that is excusable. But if you tell me that the foremost, highest paid "investment experts" of the land were unable to smell something as huge as this worldwide financial crisis coming, my only conclusion is that this whole discipline is witchcraft.

    Which of course is the only logical conclusion that one can make.

  28. #778
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EBD
    The dart throwing monkey is an analogy and never actually happened.
    This is one of the most beloved urban legends of people who need an excuse for their poor luck.
    But the point the story is meant to make is generally true.

    Hence ETF. Don't beat the market, buy the market. Diversified and better yield than property.

    On a general note. Do you think all 6.7 billion humans are picking stocks? Is your comparison fair?
    Ya I agree - what the "monkey" is trying to illustrate is the "ETF". But there was actually a real monkey throwing darts. There are quite a number of articles on Raven, the 6-year old female Chimpanzee which threw darts in 1999 and even had her own stock index monkeydex.com (now defunct).

    The Register

    Brokers go ape-shit bananas over monkey business

    By Tim Richardson
    Posted in Business, 13th January 2000 11:22 GMT

    A chimp that chose her portfolio of Internet stocks by chucking darts at a list of companies has been hailed a financial whizz kid by her keeper.

    Six-year-old Raven delivered a 213 per cent gain on 1999 outperforming most of the yuppies on Wall Street.

    Indeed, had she been employed at a Wall Street Mutual Fund, it's claimed her performance would have ranked as the 22nd best money manager in the country -- outperforming more than 6,000 Wall Street pros.

    The monkey business began in January of 1999 when Raven lobbed darts at a list of 133 Internet-related stocks, to create her own financial index, MonkeyDex (http://www.monkeydex.com).

    During the last year her selection has just surpassed all expectations. "She quadrupled the performance of the Dow and doubled the performance of the Nasdaq composite," said Roland Perry, editor of the Internet Stock Review and creator of the MonkeyDex, billed as the "Internet's first index of Internet stocks picked by an actual monkey"

    "Not bad considering she wasn't able to participate in any of the hot new issue offerings," he said.

    Raven recently returned to Wall Street to pick this year's selection from 281 Internet-related stocks. They are: Audible.com, Broadcom, eToys, Litronic, Medium4.com, Lycos, N2H2, Prodigy, Software.com, and StarMedia. Game on.
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2000/01...umps_lose_out/

  29. #779
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EBD
    After our enbloc the subprime was raging but had hardly blipped on local news. Somehow asia had magically decoupled the theory went. Prices here were soaring for homes still. I couldn't believe the party could continue from a fundemental point of view as decoupling was just not true.

    If I had simply dumped all my proceeds back into the property market I would have got a smaller unit in the same locale. Then watch it plunge 40% in 6-12 months.

    Instead we bought US$ bonds waiting to see how the situation in US and europe would play out. After watching the yield get obliterated as people ran to the US Bonds for safety and the prices go up we sold in Dec for a tidy profit & started buying wide baskets of funds and high yield bond funds.

    I just put down my 5% on a bigger apartment same location, nearly 40% off peak prices which is when our old apartment got taken from us.

    This is being active to me. & it is nerve wracking but proved far better than my previous philosophy of just dump into property alone and hope for the best. Maybe you can be dismiss me as just being lucky.
    The "decoupling" theory was held by many during the early days of the financial crisis. It is now with hindsight that many think it to be foolish.

    What you have done was very dangerous. You could have been left behind if the property market had shot up up in the interim. It is simply not worth the risk.

    You are very lucky (I think you would have expected me to say that).

  30. #780
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    197

    Default br

    The ppty market is now in a strong cyclical bull market after a deep recession. Prices will appreciate sharply and we will surpase the 2007 peak.

Similar Threads

  1. Property Market Sentiments - According to the ground
    By mcmlxxvi in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 234
    -: 13-02-13, 15:36
  2. Property Market Sentiments 2012
    By Laguna in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 218
    -: 01-09-12, 02:38
  3. Property market sentiments 2011
    By rattydrama in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 4793
    -: 22-12-11, 12:54
  4. Property measures cool sentiments
    By mr funny in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 5
    -: 18-01-11, 01:51
  5. Property market sentiments 2010
    By Property_Owner in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 4291
    -: 28-12-10, 23:54

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •