This round of QE will not increase Singapore landed property prices:

[equalizer]

No data. just want to point out thats all. the whole world can buy singapore condos. only singapore citizens can buy landed.

Yes, but govt has already spelt out they want to grow SG citizens with advisors providing figures of 25K to 35K p.a. whereas I am not getting any feel from you of the potential of worldwide demand. I also remain unconvinced until you have conclusive numbers to show me otherwise.

[Ringo33]

If you look at historical price charts (sori ah, chart a bit old but just to put the pt across), prices tend to move in tandem across all segments. You should ask yrself the question. If this 'hv price no mkt' effect is gonna happen for landed, don't you think it will also happen for other segments as well? Its the same kinda argument that BJ21 (no offence bro) is promoting by saying that QE will not have an impact on landed but will have an impact on condos...

As I have mentioned before, the chart which tracks landed property might not reflect the actual price gain of landed property purely because it does not factor in A&A or rebuilding cost.

If you track the price movement of landed property, you will also noticed price movement of semi d and terrace houses always seem to lag behind detached houses both on the up and down trend. Perhaps this is a good indication that investors who make money from landed are those in the detached housing segment.

[Ringo33]

Yes, but govt has already spelt out they want to grow SG citizens with advisors providing figures of 25K to 35K p.a. whereas I am not getting any feel from you of the potential of worldwide demand. I also remain unconvinced until you have conclusive numbers to show me otherwise.

From 2007 to 2010, Singapore's intake of new citizens ranged from over 17,334 to 20,513. Last year (2011) saw 15,777 additions to the citizen population.

can you provide the source which the government says they are targeting at 25K to 35K new citizen pa?

beside talking about new citizens, have you also factor in the long term impact of landed property demand caused by MAS decision to scrap FIS and raise the bar for GIP? I believe in the past if was easier for PR to buy landed, as for now, it is almost impossible.

[Ringo33]

1) It is meaningless to compare the supply of condo vs landed without comparing their respective demand. Yes condo supply is more than landed, but so is demand for condo and vice versa for landed.

So pray tell where is the demand going to come from for condos. Go examine yr population stats. FT/PRs? Organic population growth? Govt has already mentioned that they will be moderating FT/PRs intake but wants to focus on increasing new citizens. What does this mean when translated to the current pool of buyers for condos vs the current pool of buyers for landed?

what I am trying to sell you is that if you compare the supply of landed verse condo, it is meaningless. in economic 101, they teach you supply and demand, they never teach you supply and supply or demand and demand. get it?

[Ringo33]

[/color]
2) The influx of new citizens will have very limited impact on landed property because it is more unlikely that property investors are going to simply give up their citizenship just to buy landed property to generate <2% yield. Unless you have figures to show how many of the new citizens are actually buying into landed, or else, it is just pure speculating.

Ahem..aren't you forgetting about the govt tough stance to moderate in Emplt Passes and PRs. At least the pool of buyers available for landed is increasing whilst the pool of buyers for condos/apts is shrinking. Govt studies have shown that they need an additonal 25K to 35K new citizens each yr. If they aim for say the lowest target of 25K p.a. and assuming ONLY 10% of these buy a landed, it still amounts to 2500 purchases of landed PER YEAR. I do not know why u r so fixated on yr <2% yield. These new citizens are here to set up home. They are buying for stay NOT for rental whereas the converse is true for EP or PRs who are either in the mkt to rent or to purchase for investment.

I dont think I should comment too much of what you said as those number which you highlighted are pure speculation at best.

But based on the sentence which I highlighted in red, I just want to say that you must have misunderstood what the government is trying to do here. government is actually cutting down on the E passes for low skills labor, who are employed by construction companies, shiprepairs and SMEs. And these are not the typical guy who will walking to the showflat to buy condo, so I am not sure how this is going to impact on the demand for condo, or even rental. Plus, do you really need an E pass or PR to buy condo in Singapore?


I noticed you have been telling us about the 25-35k new citizen. May I know where is your source?

[Ringo33]

4) I am not sure if you understand the quantum effect in property. Many time people like to justify that landed psf is so low as compared to condo psf, so landed is cheap. Do you hear any condo investors arguing that because MM psf is so high and their 3 to 4 bedder condo are undervalue.
I would agree with you if the quantum for condos were as low back in the gd ol days but this is here and now. HDB flats are going for abv 1M, gd MM units are also hovering ard there. To get a 3-4 bedrm of mebbe 1200sf, how much do you hv to pay nowadays? 2-3mil? If you compare the living space of 1200sf (which often includes large balconies, planterbox, baywindows and bomb shelter), doesn't it make sense to pay a bit more to get the lving space of a landed?

the solution to the problem you just mention is that developers can shrink the unit size to make it affordable. While for landed, you cant simply cut the 1000sqft land size into half and build 2 units can you?

1200sqft, you can still get them below 1m in OCR region. getting a landed property will be 3 times that amount. pay a little more??? that is 300% more my friend.

[equalizer]

As I have mentioned before, the chart which tracks landed property might not reflect the actual price gain of landed property purely because it does not factor in A&A or rebuilding cost.

If you track the price movement of landed property, you will also noticed price movement of semi d and terrace houses always seem to lag behind detached houses both on the up and down trend. Perhaps this is a good indication that investors who make money from landed are those in the detached housing segment.

I can also say that that some condo transactions do not take into account renovation costs so the gains there may be artficially inflated. For owners who have held the units for some time and then sold, you also have not factored in the maintenance fees that they have paid over the yrs for condos. There are no maintenance fees for landed.

For landed , I believe there are sales of old totally unrefurbished houses as well as new ones so it kind of balances/averages out the 'actual' gains. The perceived differential which you are under the impression that exist is probably way lower than you think.

can you provide the source which the government says they are targeting at 25K to 35K new citizen pa?

beside talking about new citizens, have you also factor in the long term impact of landed property demand caused by MAS decision to scrap FIS and raise the bar for GIP? I believe in the past if was easier for PR to buy landed, as for now, it is almost impossible.

For someone who seems to know abt FIS/GIP, I am surprised you do not know the source of the population immigrant studdies. Very well, sppon feed you...Please refer to the report by the national population and talent division -nptd.gov.sg which indicated a need for at leaset 25K each yr just to keep our popuiation size stable. The other study is by the Institute of Policy studies which indicates a need for 30K new immigrants per yr. Both these reports are the basis in a national discussion which will culminate in a white paper by the govt.

For the FIS and GIP schemes, PRs still needed to obtain LDU approval before they buy landed. Our dear law minsiter has already said that approvals were very strict as far as landed was concerned. The numbers which were approved are probably very small and I think hardly makes a dent when you are looking at an immigrant influx of 25K per year.


[quote=Ringo33]what I am trying to sell you is that if you compare the supply of landed verse condo, it is meaningless. in economic 101, they teach you supply and demand, they never teach you supply and supply or demand and demand. get it?

You probably have not my read my post properly. I am comparing demand with supply.

What constitutes POTENTIAL (why potential is becos not all of them may want to buy a property) demand pool for foreigner eligible pte condo/apt in SG ?

SG citizens, PRs, all foreigners based in SG + overseas (which is probly a very small percentage)

Pipeline supply of condos/apt as at 2Q12 is 83K with a main portion coming onstream in 2014/2015 (see URA stats since you are so hung up on references).

If govt clamps down on EP as well as PR applications, your demand pool gets smaller whilst the supply pool is still going to grow by 83K. Based on simple economics theory, aren't you having lesser pot. demand chasing a larger supply stock?

Before you poo-poo this and say that PRs and EP clamp down is only for unskilled labour etc, go and read up TCJ's speech and presentation carefully. The main aim is to improve the quality of SG's workforce and that doesn't just mean unskilled labour. I don't think I need to give you references for that.

on the oth hand, if govt comes up with white paper and adopts the recommendation immigrant influx numbers, the pool of 25K new citizens p.a. will increase the potential demand pool for landed significantly which incidentally is a smaller subset (i.e SG citizens plus approved foreginers) of the pot. demand pool for condos/apts. With an almost neglible increase in pipeline supply of landed stock, won't you have more pot demand chasing the same stock of landed?

the solution to the problem you just mention is that developers can shrink the unit size to make it affordable. While for landed, you cant simply cut the 1000sqft land size into half and build 2 units can you?

1200sqft, you can still get them below 1m in OCR region. getting a landed property will be 3 times that amount. pay a little more??? that is 300% more my friend.

I don't know whether you even follow the news recently but there have been new guidelines implemented for MM units. Developers just can't keep cutting down apts to improve affordability anymore so I am afraid yr quantum effect theory is just that, a theory. Anyway, you shouldn't even be comparing MM to landed. The price of a 200s0sf+ 4-5 bedrm condo wld be more appropriate.

Its seems you not only follow the news but probaly don't keep abreast of prices too. Please try this simple experiment for me, goto www.propertyguru,com.sg.
Search for an apt/condo in say, I give an ulu district 18 Tampines/Pasir Ris (no offence to tampines/pasir ris residents), under search criteria, try to find a min 3 bedrm apt with a max amt of $1mil and tenure : FH. Let me know whether you get any hits. If you do get any, its probly those vto or with no prices.

I dont think I should comment too much of what you said as those number which you highlighted are pure speculation at best.

But based on the sentence which I highlighted in red, I just want to say that you must have misunderstood what the government is trying to do here. government is actually cutting down on the E passes for low skills labor, who are employed by construction companies, shiprepairs and SMEs. And these are not the typical guy who will walking to the showflat to buy condo, so I am not sure how this is going to impact on the demand for condo, or even rental. Plus, do you really need an E pass or PR to buy condo in Singapore?
So much for another "power" quality post...

Some of it may be speculation but at least i have provided some stats and figures to back up my case.

Now its my turn to ask you & BJ21 : What substantive figures do you have to back up the claim that the latest round of QE3 will not increase the price of landed but will increase the price of condos?

It is certainly ery easy to make sweeping statments and ask for references here & there huh?

As for the EP/PR clamp down,,,go read TCJ's message clearly.

Please give me yr references too and not just a silly economics 101 ss/dd curve chart.

So much for another "power" quality post.

[blackjack21trader]

....
Now its my turn to ask you & BJ21 : What substantive figures do you have to back up the claim that the latest round of QE3 will not increase the price of landed but will increase the price of condos?
....

wahlaueh.. brother, dun bring me into the water leh. All brothers and sisters here know since day one that I have no figure, but only an extra eye leh.

[blackjack21trader]

......
As for the EP/PR clamp down,,,go read TCJ's message clearly.

Please give me yr references too and not just a silly economics 101 ss/dd curve chart.

So much for another "power" quality post.

please continue the debate with other brothers here. when I see your england all so bombastic and theory and thinking skill so good..I very paiseh lah.....I got very inferior complex leh.......

[blackjack21trader]

But I must say my third eye tend to agree more with brother ringo33 la. WOAHAHAHAHHAHAHHHEHHEHEHEHHEHE

[Ringo33]

I can also say that that some condo transactions do not take into account renovation costs so the gains there may be artficially inflated. For owners who have held the units for some time and then sold, you also have not factored in the maintenance fees that they have paid over the yrs for condos. There are no maintenance fees for landed.

For landed , I believe there are sales of old totally unrefurbished houses as well as new ones so it kind of balances/averages out the 'actual' gains. The perceived differential which you are under the impression that exist is probably way lower than you think.

For condo, I can show your actual profitable deals of how condo investors could make incredible margin from sub sale or people selling brand new condo bought and sold within a year. So there will be no argument about reno cost.

Can you do like wise for landed? Perhaps not.

[Ringo33]

For someone who seems to know abt FIS/GIP, I am surprised you do not know the source of the population immigrant studdies. Very well, sppon feed you...Please refer to the report by the national population and talent division -nptd.gov.sg which indicated a need for at leaset 25K each yr just to keep our popuiation size stable. The other study is by the Institute of Policy studies which indicates a need for 30K new immigrants per yr. Both these reports are the basis in a national discussion which will culminate in a white paper by the govt.

For the FIS and GIP schemes, PRs still needed to obtain LDU approval before they buy landed. Our dear law minsiter has already said that approvals were very strict as far as landed was concerned. The numbers which were approved are probably very small and I think hardly makes a dent when you are looking at an immigrant influx of 25K per year.

thanks for pointing out nptd.gov.sg and I notice that you have soften your tone from 25-35k to just 25k. Could you show me the link which they recommend to increase the intake of new citizen from current level to 25-35k.

While you are at it, you might want to look at the demographic profile of new SC before insisting the new SC is going to boost the demand for landed property. Remember, while new SC come, old SC go (as in die lah). And with SC average family size getting smaller, do you have reason to believe they demand for landed will continue to thrive?

From 2007-2011, 38% of new SCs were granted to
working individuals, while 62% were dependants. Like
new PRs, new SCs are generally young and have good
educational qualifications. 53% of new SCs were under
30 years old, and of those over 20 years old, 61% had
a diploma or higher qualification.

[Ringo33]

You probably have not my read my post properly. I am comparing demand with supply.

Actually I did, you were comparing supply vs supply, and demand vs demand separately. perhaps you could show me in which of your earlier post you compare supply and demand in a meaningful way.

[Ringo33]

What constitutes POTENTIAL (why potential is becos not all of them may want to buy a property) demand pool for foreigner eligible pte condo/apt in SG ?

SG citizens, PRs, all foreigners based in SG + overseas (which is probly a very small percentage)

Pipeline supply of condos/apt as at 2Q12 is 83K with a main portion coming onstream in 2014/2015 (see URA stats since you are so hung up on references).

If govt clamps down on EP as well as PR applications, your demand pool gets smaller whilst the supply pool is still going to grow by 83K. Based on simple economics theory, aren't you having lesser pot. demand chasing a larger supply stock?

Before you poo-poo this and say that PRs and EP clamp down is only for unskilled labour etc, go and read up TCJ's speech and presentation carefully. The main aim is to improve the quality of SG's workforce and that doesn't just mean unskilled labour. I don't think I need to give you references for that.

on the oth hand, if govt comes up with white paper and adopts the recommendation immigrant influx numbers, the pool of 25K new citizens p.a. will increase the potential demand pool for landed significantly which incidentally is a smaller subset (i.e SG citizens plus approved foreginers) of the pot. demand pool for condos/apts. With an almost neglible increase in pipeline supply of landed stock, won't you have more pot demand chasing the same stock of landed?

Can I excuse myself from commenting on what you said because I dont see a point on debating on speculation and opinion instead of hard facts.

And btw, condo investors doesnt want all non Singaporeans residents to buy condo, they want them to RENT.

[Ringo33]

Btw, can you please reply my post separately instead of lumping them together because it will be easier for you to post, easier for me to reply and also help remind you what you have written.

[equalizer]

For condo, I can show your actual profitable deals of how condo investors could make incredible margin from sub sale or people selling brand new condo bought and sold within a year. So there will be no argument about reno cost.

Can you do like wise for landed? Perhaps not.

I am sure you can do that by showing txns frm the gd ol days when there was no 4yr ssd. Show me a txn which was done recently where an apt was bought within the 4 yr ssd and then sold for an incredible margin.

[equalizer]

thanks for pointing out nptd.gov.sg and I notice that you have soften your tone from 25-35k to just 25k. Could you show me the link which they recommend to increase the intake of new citizen from current level to 25-35k.

While you are at it, you might want to look at the demographic profile of new SC before insisting the new SC is going to boost the demand for landed property. Remember, while new SC come, old SC go (as in die lah). And with SC average family size getting smaller, do you have reason to believe they demand for landed will continue to thrive?

If you read my original post, i used the baseline 25k as the basis for my computations and not the higher end so no need to nitpik. Go read the studies. They are only studies but will b used in a national discussion which will result in a govt white paper. It is a reasonable assumption to use and at least i do hv some backing docs to support my case vs oth pple who do have anything substantiv at all.

Oh dear, you think the pple who did the studies dont take into a/c attrition rate?

[lajia]

From an investment point of view and for a own stay point of view is very different. Be it FH or LH, if you buy a PH for 1.5mil for own stay then of course most will think it is more worthwhile to buy a 1.8mil landed with much bigger buildup. With QE prices of condo will move up and landed already very high?? This one got no record to prove so no point arguing...
Both pricing will move in same direction and this one history should be able to prove.
How can condo price keep going and then landed has peaked....this is quite nonsense in my opinion. TS could be out with a good sharing intention but could also have a motive, just like when u hear ppl say buy buy buy, then maybe it's time for you to run run and run

No Offence...

[equalizer]

Can I excuse myself from commenting on what you said because I dont see a point on debating on speculation and opinion instead of hard facts.

And btw, condo investors doesnt want all non Singaporeans residents to buy condo, they want them to RENT.

Typical cop out when u hv nothing substantive to bring to the table. I do not see any hard facts frm u to support the thread title either. Its always easy to tear down but i hv yet to see any substance frm u yet.

Investment returns dont only comprise rental but also capital appreciation. There must b an exit pt to realise yr profits. Besides, clamp dwn on ep/pr will only spell bad news for investor who intend to rent.

[equalizer]

Actually I did, you were comparing supply vs supply, and demand vs demand separately. perhaps you could show me in which of your earlier post you compare supply and demand in a meaningful way.

Since u hv excuse yrself frm commenting on this (which you obviously hv no counter to), why are you still asking for an explanation?

You still haven't provided any hard facts to back thread title so i presume it is worst than just speculation or opinion and just a downright inaccurate comment.

[equalizer]

What a kindergarden technique...challenge pple to provide backing info and when they present something which you cannot counter , dismiss it as speculation/opinion. Come on, any child can do that...

[hopeful]

to Equaliser:
you are saying that there will be lower demand for condos because lower supply of EPs/PRs/ etc, ignoring the fact that foreigners who are not working and/or not residing in singapore can purchase condos.

you can see read the proportion of
http://www.btinvest.com.sg/system/as...0Q2%202012.pdf

for older years.
http://www.dtz.com/portal/downloadCo...000c02a8c0____

You can see the proportion of foreign buyers are quite big enough,10% thereabouts. (or is that small?).
of course with the introduction of ABSD, proportion of foreigners drop from in 2012Q1.

what BJ21 point is: supply of buyer for landed is suppressed, but any tom, dick, harry in the world can buy condo as long as got money.
$500k also can MM condo
$800k also cannot buy 3 year lease remaining landed in Geylang (without LDU permission.).

Now according to BJ21, cos of QE3, money will come to singapore.
question time: where will money goes to?
i am sure money doesnt go to fixed deposits.
if it doesnt go to stocks, then it go to other asset classes like properties.

now if hot money decide to go to properties, it can go to commercial, residential etc. and if it goes to residential, then it will go to non-landed properties because it can.

personally i also would want landed, but since i am restricted from doing so, no choice but to buy non-landed. perhaps can consider me as a microcosm of foreign money flowing into singapore to buy non-landed?

or perhaps, BJ21 is wrong, QE3 will not increase any price, both and non-landed.

[insigina]

to Equaliser:
you are saying that there will be lower demand for condos because lower supply of EPs/PRs/ etc, ignoring the fact that foreigners who are not working and/or not residing in singapore can purchase condos.

you can see read the proportion of
http://www.btinvest.com.sg/system/as...0Q2%202012.pdf

for older years.
http://www.dtz.com/portal/downloadCo...000c02a8c0____

You can see the proportion of foreign buyers are quite big enough,10% thereabouts. (or is that small?).
of course with the introduction of ABSD, proportion of foreigners drop from in 2012Q1.

what BJ21 point is: supply of buyer for landed is suppressed, but any tom, dick, harry in the world can buy condo as long as got money.
$500k also can MM condo
$800k also cannot buy 3 year lease remaining landed in Geylang (without LDU permission.).

Now according to BJ21, cos of QE3, money will come to singapore.
question time: where will money goes to?
i am sure money doesnt go to fixed deposits.
if it doesnt go to stocks, then it go to other asset classes like properties.

now if hot money decide to go to properties, it can go to commercial, residential etc. and if it goes to residential, then it will go to non-landed properties because it can.

personally i also would want landed, but since i am restricted from doing so, no choice but to buy non-landed. perhaps can consider me as a microcosm of foreign money flowing into singapore to buy non-landed?

or perhaps, BJ21 is wrong, QE3 will not increase any price, both and non-landed.

Good summary. One question. If non-landed goes up as a result of the above, sellers of these properties would have the liquidity to buy landed thereby causing the landed to rise? My assumption here is these sellers of non-landed are SC.

[hopeful]

Good summary. One question. If non-landed goes up as a result of the above, sellers of these properties would have the liquidity to buy landed thereby causing the landed to rise? My assumption here is these sellers of non-landed are SC.

i dont have the answers.
but lets say i am a buyer of size, eg fund.
would it be easier for me to negotiate with 30 individual sellers or would i rather negotiate directly with a developer for 30 units in a new launch (or the unsold properties) ?
so with that, the developer bosses probably would buy the expensive landed.

as for individual foreigners, i dont know, i either buy from developer, buy/sell to other foreigners. not once have i transacted with singaporean citizen. maybe singaporean citizen keep their CCR properties, whereas foreigner buy and sell?

if foreigner buy the cheaper condo from local, can local use the money to buy landed? i dont know. i must confess i am not that interested in landed as i cannot play in it.

[equalizer]

to Equaliser:
you are saying that there will be lower demand for condos because lower supply of EPs/PRs/ etc, ignoring the fact that foreigners who are not working and/or not residing in singapore can purchase condos.

you can see read the proportion of
http://www.btinvest.com.sg/system/as...0Q2%202012.pdf

for older years.
http://www.dtz.com/portal/downloadCo...000c02a8c0____

You can see the proportion of foreign buyers are quite big enough,10% thereabouts. (or is that small?).
of course with the introduction of ABSD, proportion of foreigners drop from in 2012Q1.

what BJ21 point is: supply of buyer for landed is suppressed, but any tom, dick, harry in the world can buy condo as long as got money.
$500k also can MM condo
$800k also cannot buy 3 year lease remaining landed in Geylang (without LDU permission.).

Now according to BJ21, cos of QE3, money will come to singapore.
question time: where will money goes to?
i am sure money doesnt go to fixed deposits.
if it doesnt go to stocks, then it go to other asset classes like properties.

now if hot money decide to go to properties, it can go to commercial, residential etc. and if it goes to residential, then it will go to non-landed properties because it can.

personally i also would want landed, but since i am restricted from doing so, no choice but to buy non-landed. perhaps can consider me as a microcosm of foreign money flowing into singapore to buy non-landed?

or perhaps, BJ21 is wrong, QE3 will not increase any price, both and non-landed.

@hopeful

Thk you for yr post and I appreciate the time taken to do yr research. The links you gave are very informative. I could easily say that what you have posted is speculation and opinion and excuse myself but I won't.

Let me try to tackle yr point :

According to the BTinvest chart as at Q2 12, the breakdown is as follows:

Q2 12 Pte residential txns by residential status
Singaporeans - 78%
SPR -15%
Foreigners - 7%
Companies - 1%

Foreigners only constituted 7% whilst companies which cld be SG companies or possibly yr "Funds" only constituted 1%.

Accoriding to report, no. of purchases by non-residential foreigners was abt 611 per qtr. Even if we assume that QE3 causes a spurt in buying interest by foreigners and it increases by 20%, the additional units attributable to QE3 will only be abt 122 or about 500 units per yr which to me won't cause waves in the mkt.

The buying by companies (yr funds) is even smaller (1%) and imho will be pretty neglible even with the impact of QE3. If it wasn't a major contirbutor during QE1 and QE2, I seriously doubt whether QE3 is going make the funds look our way. We have also imposed quite a few restrictions along the way like ABSD & SSD plus the on-stream supply may scare them off.


We must not forget the efforts by govt to slim down PR population as well as EP, so this will not only dent rental revenues but also purchases by PR. As there is no indication of targets by govt, I cannot give you the impact but my gut feel is net net, the positive impact of QE3 will be negated by the decrease in PR numbers.

The key motivation for any non-residential foreigner to buy a property in SG will be rental yield and caiital appreciation. With fewer EP/PRs being issued, rental yield will be impacted. Furthermore they will have to pay the ABSD as well as wait 4 yrs to avoid the SSD to exit. So the motivation may be muted in my opinion. We must also take ito account the supply comin on-stream...83K units is no joke and I am sure foreigners will also take this into accont before deciding to purhcase an apt/condo in SG.

On the other hand, if govt intensifies its efforts to increase new citizens, the demand pool for landed will increase. You must also know that some of these new citizens will be converted from PRs so the PR pool may shrink further.

By becoming new citizens, they are setting up roots here and will most probly be looking for an owner occupied residence. Landed (which was previously shut off frm them) will become an attractive proposition. They will also no longer be subject to ABSD as long as they don't own more than 2 ppties.

With new supply of landed being very small and the excess liquidity from QE3, landed may become a more viable option for them as an owner occupied residence.

[Ringo33]

I am sure you can do that by showing txns frm the gd ol days when there was no 4yr ssd. Show me a txn which was done recently where an apt was bought within the 4 yr ssd and then sold for an incredible margin.

SSD applies to both landed and condo, so I am not sure why do you need to bring this up. Why not show us landed property transaction prior to SSD to prove your point instead of asking ridicules request?

Obviously you dont have the facts to prove your point dont you?

[equalizer]

@hopeful

Oh btw...personally.. i do hope you will achieve yr landed soon. Not becos I am trying to prove my point here but becos we need more people like you here.

TQ for an interesting post and discussion.

[equalizer]

SSD applies to both landed and condo, so I am not sure why do you need to bring this up. Why not show us landed property transaction prior to SSD to prove your point instead of asking ridicules request?

First you boast that you can show me a transaction with incredible margins. When I call on your bluff and ask you to show me one in current context i.e with SSD, you try to turn it around and ask me to show one instead .

As I said...kindergarden technique of answering post....you want me to show then you must show me first....

Come on...something substantive from you will indeed be refreshing.

[Pinball]

no pt wasting your precious time+effort with this guy or the other one with iq of 21. if you did not realise it, the ringo chap has an iq of 33.

First you boast that you can show me a transaction with incredible margins. When I call on your bluff and ask you to show me one in current context i.e with SSD, you try to turn it around and ask me to show one instead .

As I said...kindergarden technique of answering post....you want me to show then you must show me first....

Come on...something substantive from you will indeed be refreshing.

[Ringo33]

If you read my original post, i used the baseline 25k as the basis for my computations and not the higher end so no need to nitpik. Go read the studies. They are only studies but will b used in a national discussion which will result in a govt white paper. It is a reasonable assumption to use and at least i do hv some backing docs to support my case vs oth pple who do have anything substantiv at all.

Oh dear, you think the pple who did the studies dont take into a/c attrition rate?

NO NO, I was just asking for your source of information on government policy for new SC. Till now i only hear you making lots of baseless assumption about it, but no concrete proof to validate your information.

25K to 35K is around 40% leh, is that nitpicking?

There is no need to make baseless assumption and speculation about the whitepaper. Till now, you couldnt even show us the link to the part where the government talk about increasing new SC to 25-35K per year.

Btw, is there any reason why you didnt comment any about the demography profile of new SC I posted earlier?