Page 143 of 148 FirstFirst ... 113118123128133138139140141142143144145146147 ... LastLast
Results 4,261 to 4,290 of 4428

Thread: A few CCR transactions sold at a loss (reported in The Edge)

  1. #4261
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    9,217

    Default

    DBSS flat resold for record $1.18m in Bishan by ST 1 Feb 2017.

    Quote Originally Posted by teddybear View Post
    Fret now, as long as your property size is small, absolute price is less than $1.5M (regardless of size), there will always be takers (from some goon-du)!

    If not, just make sure your house has good feng shui and there will always be lots of China's Chinese buying (and they are buying and supporting OCR private property prices) - The recent property transactions statistics already gave us a glimpse of that fact!

  2. #4262
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    Watermark

    Sold 26 JAN 2017 3 RODYK STREET #XX-XX 1,733sq ft 1,460psf
    Bought 17 AUG 2007 1,780psf

    on paper a good buy.

  3. #4263
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by teddybear View Post
    Fret now, as long as your property size is small, absolute price is less than $1.5M (regardless of size), there will always be takers (from some goon-du)!

    If not, just make sure your house has good feng shui and there will always be lots of China's Chinese buying (and they are buying and supporting OCR private property prices) - The recent property transactions statistics already gave us a glimpse of that fact!
    Quote Originally Posted by stalingrad View Post
    Thanks, Teddy. Happy New Year. Our crappy condo measures 1302 sqf. Not sure it is small or large. But I would be happy to get rid of it for less than 1.5 mil. Hope you are right and we are safe from the market free fall.
    You just missed the largest gains starting this year. I think authorities was waiting for you to cash out then they started to change the directions.
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

    Where there is kelong, there is guni.
    No kelong no guni.
    More kelong = more guni.

  4. #4264
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    The Trillium

    Sold 1 MAR 2017 118 KIM SENG ROAD #XX-XX 2,217sq ft 1,632psf
    Bought 20 JUN 2011 1,901psf

  5. #4265
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    Watermark

    Sold 26 JAN 2017 3 RODYK STREET #XX-XX 1,733sq ft 1,460psf
    Bought 17 AUG 2007 1,780psf

  6. #4266
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    St Regis

    Sold 13 MAR 2017 33 TANGLIN ROAD #XX-XX 2,142sq ft 2,000psf
    Bought 20 MAR 2007 2,581psf

    2nd lowest psf in the last 3 years (or more) since the project's all time low psf of 1923psf in Jan 2015

  7. #4267
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    The Fernhill

    Sold 13 MAR 2017 1 FERNHILL ROAD #XX-XX 1,604sq ft 1,609psf
    Bought 4 JUN 2007 2,265psf

  8. #4268
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    Scotts Square

    Sold 20 MAR 2017 8 SCOTTS ROAD #XX-XX 624sq ft 2,899psf
    Bought 12 NOV 2007 3,798psf

  9. #4269
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    138

    Default

    wow, this one loss close to 1m after 10 years

    what happened to the saying that property will surely rise over 10-20 years

    very small development

    Quote Originally Posted by bargain hunter View Post
    The Fernhill

    Sold 13 MAR 2017 1 FERNHILL ROAD #XX-XX 1,604sq ft 1,609psf
    Bought 4 JUN 2007 2,265psf

  10. #4270
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default

    Lousy location I suppose (if you have no car).......

    Quote Originally Posted by bargain hunter View Post
    The Fernhill

    Sold 13 MAR 2017 1 FERNHILL ROAD #XX-XX 1,604sq ft 1,609psf
    Bought 4 JUN 2007 2,265psf

  11. #4271
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Newbie1 View Post
    wow, this one loss close to 1m after 10 years

    what happened to the saying that property will surely rise over 10-20 years

    very small development
    Could be relative transaction?

    Happened in my friends case. Can transfer but lawyer advise to sell.

    No tax for both parties, even got funds for retirement!
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

    Where there is kelong, there is guni.
    No kelong no guni.
    More kelong = more guni.

  12. #4272
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    803

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Newbie1 View Post
    wow, this one loss close to 1m after 10 years

    what happened to the saying that property will surely rise over 10-20 years

    very small development
    There are plenty of buyers who bought mass market condo in 1997 and holding on to their negative assets for the last 20 years. There are also many buyers who bought high-end condo in 2007 and too holding on to their negative assets.

    Do you buy base on the saying that property will surely rise over 10-20 years? If you do, then there is a high chance that you will experience holding negative assets especially if you buy it during the wrong side of the property cycle.

  13. #4273
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    Whether one rents out or stays in it, you have derived 10 or 20 years of value from it. Go and calculate that amount (utility or rent) first.

    It is a bonus if it still can sell at the price one buys it, which maybe represents 8-9 out of 10 units bought in 1997 or 2007.

    Then add on the utility or rent with the selling price. A more balanced picture then emerges.



    Quote Originally Posted by Amber Woods View Post
    There are plenty of buyers who bought mass market condo in 1997 and holding on to their negative assets for the last 20 years. There are also many buyers who bought high-end condo in 2007 and too holding on to their negative assets.

    Do you buy base on the saying that property will surely rise over 10-20 years? If you do, then there is a high chance that you will experience holding negative assets especially if you buy it during the wrong side of the property cycle.
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

    Where there is kelong, there is guni.
    No kelong no guni.
    More kelong = more guni.

  14. #4274
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelonguni View Post
    Could be relative transaction?

    Happened in my friends case. Can transfer but lawyer advise to sell.

    No tax for both parties, even got funds for retirement!
    can elaborate more please?
    i (and perhap very many others) are interested in the "no tax for both parties" part

  15. #4275
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelonguni View Post
    Whether one rents out or stays in it, you have derived 10 or 20 years of value from it. Go and calculate that amount (utility or rent) first.

    It is a bonus if it still can sell at the price one buys it, which maybe represents 8-9 out of 10 units bought in 1997 or 2007.

    Then add on the utility or rent with the selling price. A more balanced picture then emerges.
    Is the more balanced picture going to be looked at in isolation or is it going to be compared with other pictures?
    for example

    Picture 1: buy in 1997, derive utility for 20 years
    Picture 2: rent for 5 years, buy in 2002, derive utility for 15 years.

    Picture 3: buy in 2007, derive utility for 10 years
    Picture 4: rent for 3 years, buy in 2010, derive utility for 7 years.

    or is Picture 1 looks better only when only compare to Picture 5: rent for 20 year, do not derive utility for 20 years.

    perhaps can look at other pictures as well.

  16. #4276
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hopeful View Post
    can elaborate more please?
    i (and perhap very many others) are interested in the "no tax for both parties" part
    To be precise, it's no ABSD.

    Roughly, it is this. The parents had a property bought many years ago worth several times in today's prices but still asked their only son (married with kids) to buy HDB and stay through MOP. Sell upon MOP and buy over the old property from the parents at a huge (steep) discount, minimising BSD as well. The loan arranged is so that the son can loan max in one person's name, reserving his wife's name and income to buy another property.

    The parents are freed from ownership and now can also buy and pay in cash and CPF if they wish to. Or use the funds for retirement. Not sure which they opted for though.

    Do check with lawyers if you want to do any stunt. Caveat emptor.
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

    Where there is kelong, there is guni.
    No kelong no guni.
    More kelong = more guni.

  17. #4277
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hopeful View Post
    Is the more balanced picture going to be looked at in isolation or is it going to be compared with other pictures?
    for example

    Picture 1: buy in 1997, derive utility for 20 years
    Picture 2: rent for 5 years, buy in 2002, derive utility for 15 years.

    Picture 3: buy in 2007, derive utility for 10 years
    Picture 4: rent for 3 years, buy in 2010, derive utility for 7 years.

    or is Picture 1 looks better only when only compare to Picture 5: rent for 20 year, do not derive utility for 20 years.

    perhaps can look at other pictures as well.
    Hehe, if you are looking at 2007 property and saying incurred loss, look at the utility value plus rent value (minus interests and expenses paid) over the 10 years.

    If you are looking at 1997 property and saying it is under water, do the same calculations over 20 years.
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

    Where there is kelong, there is guni.
    No kelong no guni.
    More kelong = more guni.

  18. #4278
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelonguni View Post
    To be precise, it's no ABSD.

    Roughly, it is this. The parents had a property bought many years ago worth several times in today's prices but still asked their only son (married with kids) to buy HDB and stay through MOP. Sell upon MOP and buy over the old property from the parents at a huge (steep) discount, minimising BSD as well. The loan arranged is so that the son can loan max in one person's name, reserving his wife's name and income to buy another property.

    The parents are freed from ownership and now can also buy and pay in cash and CPF if they wish to. Or use the funds for retirement. Not sure which they opted for though.

    Do check with lawyers if you want to do any stunt. Caveat emptor.
    disappointed upon knowing further details about the "no tax" stuff

    anyway, it is interesting to find out their thought process.
    1) banks unlikely to lend to parents if they want to buy another property (age factor?).
    2) to raise funds, if parents' don't sell, parents have to take out home equity loan, (age factor?).

    picture A
    parents gifted to the son.
    to raise funds, son have to home equity loan which cannot be used to be buy another property.

    picture B
    parents sell to the son.
    son take mortgage to pay to his parents. parents now have funds, which can be used to buy another property.
    so based on the maximum loan the son can take on his single income, they calculate the sales price.

  19. #4279
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelonguni View Post
    Hehe, if you are looking at 2007 property and saying incurred loss, look at the utility value plus rent value (minus interests and expenses paid) over the 10 years.

    If you are looking at 1997 property and saying it is under water, do the same calculations over 20 years.
    ok, so looking at the more balanced picture in isolation.

  20. #4280
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelonguni View Post
    Hehe, if you are looking at 2007 property and saying incurred loss, look at the utility value plus rent value (minus interests and expenses paid) over the 10 years.

    If you are looking at 1997 property and saying it is under water, do the same calculations over 20 years.
    Current market, vacant units are almost available at every condo. Practically landlord needs to factor in some months without rental income and the maintenance and sinking fees.

  21. #4281
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    Just trying to explain the freak transactions that most of us have no access to.

    Unless someone have clear info that it is a real valid transaction that appeared on market, such as in auctions. Two years to one year ago still have, recently no such deals.


    Quote Originally Posted by hopeful View Post
    disappointed upon knowing further details about the "no tax" stuff

    anyway, it is interesting to find out their thought process.
    1) banks unlikely to lend to parents if they want to buy another property (age factor?).
    2) to raise funds, if parents' don't sell, parents have to take out home equity loan, (age factor?).

    picture A
    parents gifted to the son.
    to raise funds, son have to home equity loan which cannot be used to be buy another property.

    picture B
    parents sell to the son.
    son take mortgage to pay to his parents. parents now have funds, which can be used to buy another property.
    so based on the maximum loan the son can take on his single income, they calculate the sales price.
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

    Where there is kelong, there is guni.
    No kelong no guni.
    More kelong = more guni.

  22. #4282
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rsrunner123 View Post
    Current market, vacant units are almost available at every condo. Practically landlord needs to factor in some months without rental income and the maintenance and sinking fees.
    Current market means 2 months, 6 months or 1 year? But yes, need to factor in definitely.
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

    Where there is kelong, there is guni.
    No kelong no guni.
    More kelong = more guni.

  23. #4283
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelonguni View Post
    Current market means 2 months, 6 months or 1 year? But yes, need to factor in definitely.
    Depend on landlord's luck and timing to fish his tenant. But I have seen some CCR units vacant for 3 months or longer, still posting at reasonable rental like neighbour's unit.

  24. #4284
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    mrt construction has taken its toll:

    the trillium

    3 fresh 3 year (or more) lows in March 2017:

    THE TRILLIUM KIM SENG ROAD Condominium 09 CCR Freehold Resale 1 3,618,000 - 2,217 Strata 01 to 05 1,632 Mar-17
    THE TRILLIUM KIM SENG ROAD Condominium 09 CCR Freehold Resale 1 3,000,000 - 1,798 Strata 01 to 05 1,669 Mar-17
    THE TRILLIUM KIM SENG ROAD Condominium 09 CCR Freehold Resale 1 3,770,000 - 2,217 Strata 01 to 05 1,700 Mar-17

    Sold 1 MAR 2017 118 KIM SENG ROAD #XX-XX 2,217sq ft 1,632psf
    Bought 20 JUN 2011 1,901psf

    Sold 17 MAR 2017 116 KIM SENG ROAD #XX-XX 1,798sq ft 1,669psf
    Bought 10 MAY 2010 1,705psf

    last one barely made a gain (but a gain nonetheless and also the rental/utility collection theory)

    Sold 20 MAR 2017 116 KIM SENG ROAD #XX-XX 2,217sq ft 1,700psf
    Bought 4 SEP 2009 1,620psf

  25. #4285
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    mrt construction has taken its toll:

    the cosmopolitan

    A fresh 3 year (or more) low and another pretty close in March 2017:

    THE COSMOPOLITAN KIM SENG ROAD Condominium 09 CCR Freehold Resale 1 2,900,000 - 1,679 Strata 11 to 15 1,727 Mar-17

    THE COSMOPOLITAN KIM SENG ROAD Condominium 09 CCR Freehold Resale 1 2,450,000 - 1,399 Strata 16 to 20 1,751 Mar-17

    sellers made huge gains though as they were bought post lehman and at launch respectively:

    Sold 6 MAR 2017 202 KIM SENG ROAD #XX-XX 1,679sq ft 1,727psf
    Bought 19 OCT 2008 1,420psf

    Sold 15 MAR 2017 200 KIM SENG ROAD #XX-XX 1,399sq ft 1,751psf
    Bought 21 APR 2005 1,030psf

  26. #4286
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    mrt construction has taken its toll:

    tribeca

    2 fresh 3 year (or more) lows (for standard sized units) in March 2017:

    TRIBECA KIM SENG ROAD Condominium 09 CCR Freehold Resale 1 3,100,000 - 1,905 Strata 16 to 20 1,627 Mar-17
    TRIBECA KIM SENG ROAD Condominium 09 CCR Freehold Resale 1 2,230,000 - 1,367 Strata 01 to 05 1,631 Mar-17

    didn't lose much though:

    Sold 15 MAR 2017 60 KIM SENG ROAD #XX-XX 1,905sq ft 1,627psf
    Bought 29 NOV 2010 1,669psf

    Sold 3 MAR 2017 60 KIM SENG ROAD #XX-XX 1,367sq ft 1,631psf
    Bought 9 SEP 2010 1,693psf

  27. #4287
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    in all 3 projects, transactions took place at 16xx to 17xxpsf.

    pretty similar to the PLQ launch in psf but much larger quantum.

  28. #4288
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    290

    Default

    Thanks for the effort and my favourite thread. Do you see more weakness ahead in CCR?
    Any bargain hunting lately?

  29. #4289
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Khng8 View Post
    Thanks for the effort and my favourite thread. Do you see more weakness ahead in CCR?
    Any bargain hunting lately?
    its more of the same actually. occasionally, there will be some interesting fire sales but as a whole, there is not "more weakness" to speak of.

    Yesterday, I saw an advert for a 3 bedder unit at Cube 8 (not the most desirable of CCR of course) that was asking for <1100psf. I think the ad was posted at 12am+ tues morning. I called at 12pm and he told me sold already. while i am not sure if its a real transaction, i think it may be real. the ad has since been taken down. we may also not see the caveat if the unit was paid for by some cash rich buyer in full cash.

  30. #4290
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    33

    Default

    Suddenly SG properties looks real cheap...

    http://www.thestar.com.my/news/regio...ter-discounts/

Similar Threads

  1. Proportion of loss-making transactions in resale market up in November
    By New Reporter in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 0
    -: 28-12-20, 21:35
  2. A few RCR transactions sold at a loss
    By wannabe in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 12
    -: 22-07-16, 17:21
  3. St REGIS: Sold for $15.8 mio loss
    By gsmsimmax3 in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 11
    -: 18-03-15, 16:26
  4. More private properties being sold at a loss
    By reporter2 in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 0
    -: 05-02-15, 16:05
  5. Any RCR transaction sold at loss yet?
    By Poloclub in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 5
    -: 23-03-12, 00:16

Posting Permissions

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