FLAMINGO VALLEY, FH

[isaaclim]

Millionaire definition cannot include property leh which is highly leverged. If include property, then 80% of Singaporeans are millionaries. Milliionaire means liquid assets of US$1 million (SGD 1.4 million) but even with this definition, 11.4% of Singaporeans are already millionaires

Please... it is base on NET worth.... Property count but need to net off the loan amount.

[Wild Falcon]

Nope. Property excluded. Liquid assets only. That is the definitions most financial institutions use. Most surveys on percentage of millionaires use the strict definition as well. But of couse u can use your own definition lah but that would increase the no of millionaires by 10 fold. If include net property value, lots of millionaires in sg.

Please... it is base on NET worth.... Property count but need to net off the loan amount.

[devilplate]

THE NUMBER of millionaires in Singapore has risen by one-third to 80,947, the latest study by Merrill Lynch Wealth Management and Capgemini SA has estimated.
This is thanks largely to rising property and stock prices in the past last year, and highlights that the drivers of wealth creation in Singapore are assets owned by the rich.
The report, released on Wednesday, showed that Singapore's number of millionaires rose 32.7 per cent from an estimated 61,000 in 2008. A millionaire is defined someone with net assets of at least US$1 million, excluding his main residence and everyday possessions.

http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking...ry_544558.html

[jlrx]

THE NUMBER of millionaires in Singapore has risen by one-third to 80,947, the latest study by Merrill Lynch Wealth Management and Capgemini SA has estimated.
This is thanks largely to rising property and stock prices in the past last year, and highlights that the drivers of wealth creation in Singapore are assets owned by the rich.
The report, released on Wednesday, showed that Singapore's number of millionaires rose 32.7 per cent from an estimated 61,000 in 2008. A millionaire is defined someone with net assets of at least US$1 million, excluding his main residence and everyday possessions.

http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking...ry_544558.html

This definition is used by the financial industry because they want to con your money into buying those Lehman Brothers stuff.

According to the above definition, someone who fully owns and stays in a $30 million good class bungalow but has less than US$1 million in liquid assets is not considered a "millionaire".

However, someone who stays in a $300,000 HDB 3-room flat but has US$1 million to invest in Lehman Brothers minibonds is considered a "millionaire" because your assets are liquid and its easer to convince you to let them "manage" it until it becomes zero.

[devilplate]

haha nice 1!

bankers will always say high risk to invest in ppty....

[isaaclim]

THE NUMBER of millionaires in Singapore has risen by one-third to 80,947, the latest study by Merrill Lynch Wealth Management and Capgemini SA has estimated.
This is thanks largely to rising property and stock prices in the past last year, and highlights that the drivers of wealth creation in Singapore are assets owned by the rich.
The report, released on Wednesday, showed that Singapore's number of millionaires rose 32.7 per cent from an estimated 61,000 in 2008. A millionaire is defined someone with net assets of at least US$1 million, excluding his main residence and everyday possessions.

http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking...ry_544558.html

That sound to me, they do count property. Just not the one the person stayed.

[melodies]

They count "investment" properties because those can be easily sold to become cash for them to manage. Who knows? May be they help you to invest into REITs?

That sound to me, they do count property. Just not the one the person stayed.

[Wild Falcon]

Primary residence is excluded. Say a person has $1.7 million property with mortgage of $700k. Unfortunately he had hardly any cash or liquid asset to spend on other things in life. Everything stuck in property - he is NOT a millionaire. An HDB owner who fully paid his $700k Queenstown HDB (LOTS! since subsidised flats direct from HDB is very cheap and most would have fully paid up) and with $300k of savings is NOT a millionaire.

In short, a real millionaire will still have a lot of spare liquid assets to enjoy life minus his residence. In Singapore, a lot of people has their money all tied up to their residence and despite having million dollar property, lives a spartan life because everything stuck in property, drive a lousy car and has hardly anything left to enjoy life.

Trust me, if a person has a $30 million house, he would have $1 million of other assets. It's to sieved out those who only have property and nothing else - hardly impressive. $1 million of liquid assets is already easy to achieve - 11% has achieved that.

This definition is used by the financial industry because they want to con your money into buying those Lehman Brothers stuff.

According to the above definition, someone who fully owns and stays in a $30 million good class bungalow but has less than US$1 million in liquid assets is not considered a "millionaire".

However, someone who stays in a $300,000 HDB 3-room flat but has US$1 million to invest in Lehman Brothers minibonds is considered a "millionaire" because your assets are liquid and its easer to convince you to let them "manage" it until it becomes zero.

[devilplate]

Primary residence is excluded. Say a person has $1.7 million property with mortgage of $700k. Unfortunately he had hardly any cash or liquid asset to spend on other things in life. Everything stuck in property - he is NOT a millionaire. An HDB owner who fully paid his $700k Queenstown HDB (LOTS! since subsidised flats direct from HDB is very cheap and most would have fully paid up) and with $300k of savings is NOT a millionaire.

In short, a real millionaire will still have a lot of spare liquid assets to enjoy life minus his residence. In Singapore, a lot of people has their money all tied up to their residence and despite having million dollar property, lives a spartan life because everything stuck in property, drive a lousy car and has hardly anything left to enjoy life.

Trust me, if a person has a $30 million house, he would have $1 million of other assets. It's to sieved out those who only have property and nothing else - hardly impressive. $1 million of liquid assets is already easy to achieve - 11% has achieved that.

previously, u said ppty not counted...which is incorrect...such as only primary residences is not counted....tats y others argue about it....investment ppty is counted apparently.

sell primary residence and camp at changi beach and be a millionaire!

[isaaclim]

Primary residence is excluded. Say a person has $1.7 million property with mortgage of $700k. Unfortunately he had hardly any cash or liquid asset to spend on other things in life. Everything stuck in property - he is NOT a millionaire. An HDB owner who fully paid his $700k Queenstown HDB (LOTS! since subsidised flats direct from HDB is very cheap and most would have fully paid up) and with $300k of savings is NOT a millionaire.

In short, a real millionaire will still have a lot of spare liquid assets to enjoy life minus his residence. In Singapore, a lot of people has their money all tied up to their residence and despite having million dollar property, lives a spartan life because everything stuck in property, drive a lousy car and has hardly anything left to enjoy life.

Trust me, if a person has a $30 million house, he would have $1 million of other assets. It's to sieved out those who only have property and nothing else - hardly impressive. $1 million of liquid assets is already easy to achieve - 11% has achieved that.

They are just trying to exclude those that are at the margin. Those that only affort to own one 1 mil property.

The actual definition is still "NET WORTH > 1 mil"...

[DC33_2008]

Do you think there is a correlation between someone who owns several properties and drive luxury cars? Car is a liability rather than asset most of the time. Smart investors may not spend so much on car as it depreciates the day you take over the key. Car is just another way to show off their status. No face if drive a small and old car. Just a different in opinion.

Primary residence is excluded. Say a person has $1.7 million property with mortgage of $700k. Unfortunately he had hardly any cash or liquid asset to spend on other things in life. Everything stuck in property - he is NOT a millionaire. An HDB owner who fully paid his $700k Queenstown HDB (LOTS! since subsidised flats direct from HDB is very cheap and most would have fully paid up) and with $300k of savings is NOT a millionaire.

In short, a real millionaire will still have a lot of spare liquid assets to enjoy life minus his residence. In Singapore, a lot of people has their money all tied up to their residence and despite having million dollar property, lives a spartan life because everything stuck in property, drive a lousy car and has hardly anything left to enjoy life.

Trust me, if a person has a $30 million house, he would have $1 million of other assets. It's to sieved out those who only have property and nothing else - hardly impressive. $1 million of liquid assets is already easy to achieve - 11% has achieved that.

[Wild Falcon]

I don't understand this argument. A car or any other enjoyment you have in life is NEVER an investment to begin with. Buying a car or having other interest in life is not stupid or being a liability. After all, wat is the point of having so many assets, say 100 properties rented out when you don't even know how to enjoy your life? What silly response about not buying anything that is a "liability" or not having liquid assets and get everything darn cent stuck in property. Unless you belong to the cateogory that must leave every cent to your child and end up not even living your own life.

Get a life instead of worrying about putting every single cent in an asset. An asset is an item that give you "future benefits" but surely there must be something that give you "current" benefit? I hate it when people keep saying "so stupid buy car buy paintings" when it is not an asset. For goodness sake, live your life today as well and not worry about the future all the time. That's the problem with many Singaporeans - must count every single cent and make sure everything is an asset that gives them future benefit but the forget about the current.

No. A car or a vacation or a painting or a pet is NOT an asset by your definition because they depreciate by monetary value. But not everything in life is measured in monetary value.

Do you think there is a correlation between someone who owns several properties and drive luxury cars? Car is a liability rather than asset most of the time. Smart investors may not spend so much on car as it depreciates the day you take over the key. Car is just another way to show off their status. No face if drive a small and old car. Just a different in opinion.

[Wild Falcon]

OK. Now everyone agrees primary residence must be excluded or else too easy to be millionaire already. And with that strict definition, already 11% hit there. And if includes the primary residence, I suspect 50% of Singaporeans are millionaries, including HDB flat owners. BTW, I am responding to someone who said NET ASSETS which is not the general understanding - it's too wide.

previously, u said ppty not counted...which is incorrect...such as only primary residences is not counted....tats y others argue about it....investment ppty is counted apparently.

sell primary residence and camp at changi beach and be a millionaire!

[jlrx]

I don't understand this argument. A car or any other enjoyment you have in life is NEVER an investment to begin with. Buying a car or having other interest in life is not stupid or being a liability. After all, wat is the point of having so many assets, say 100 properties rented out when you don't even know how to enjoy your life? What silly response about not buying anything that is a "liability" or not having liquid assets and get everything darn cent stuck in property. Unless you belong to the cateogory that must leave every cent to your child and end up not even living your own life.

Get a life instead of worrying about putting every single cent in an asset. An asset is an item that give you "future benefits" but surely there must be something that give you "current" benefit? I hate it when people keep saying "so stupid buy car buy paintings" when it is not an asset. For goodness sake, live your life today as well and not worry about the future all the time. That's the problem with many Singaporeans - must count every single cent and make sure everything is an asset that gives them future benefit but the forget about the current.

No. A car or a vacation or a painting or a pet is NOT an asset by your definition because they depreciate by monetary value. But not everything in life is measured in monetary value.

Very good argument. Buying a luxury car is like buying a new pair of shoes, a new computer or mobile phone.

If we stop buying things just because they are "liabilities" rather than "assets" then what's the point of earning money?

[isaaclim]

OK. Now everyone agrees primary residence must be excluded or else too easy to be millionaire already. And with that strict definition, already 11% hit there. And if includes the primary residence, I suspect 50% of Singaporeans are millionaries, including HDB flat owners. BTW, I am responding to someone who said NET ASSETS which is not the general understanding - it's too wide.

NET WORTH! Please google if you still unclear the definition of net worth.

[focus]

I think both of you are right.

Wealth mgmt companies (like merrill lynch) gives the definition of USD$1mil of investible assets excluding primary place of residence as someone with a HIGH networth.

But Networth is actually All Assets (incl. primary residence) minus All Liabilities.


So if you are talking about networth, it is the later as you can be positive networth or negative networth or low networth.
But when asked whether you are a HIGH networth, you need to use the wealth mgmt companies definition.

Simply, one defines the term networth, while one classify your networth according to HIGH, VERY HIGH, ULTRA HIGH networth with an exclusion of the primary house of residence.
Think it's usd$1mi for high, usd$15mil for very high, usd$50mil for ultra high. Must look up wikipedia on the ranking.

[DC33_2008]

Pls do not get me wrong. I did not say one should not buy a car and did not say one should not buy liabilities. It is in the eye of the beholder; just like your wife/husband. No right nor wrong. Each of us has different likes and dislikes. This is very subjective even when you talk about investment strategies.

I don't understand this argument. A car or any other enjoyment you have in life is NEVER an investment to begin with. Buying a car or having other interest in life is not stupid or being a liability. After all, wat is the point of having so many assets, say 100 properties rented out when you don't even know how to enjoy your life? What silly response about not buying anything that is a "liability" or not having liquid assets and get everything darn cent stuck in property. Unless you belong to the cateogory that must leave every cent to your child and end up not even living your own life.

Get a life instead of worrying about putting every single cent in an asset. An asset is an item that give you "future benefits" but surely there must be something that give you "current" benefit? I hate it when people keep saying "so stupid buy car buy paintings" when it is not an asset. For goodness sake, live your life today as well and not worry about the future all the time. That's the problem with many Singaporeans - must count every single cent and make sure everything is an asset that gives them future benefit but the forget about the current.

No. A car or a vacation or a painting or a pet is NOT an asset by your definition because they depreciate by monetary value. But not everything in life is measured in monetary value.

[mantrix]

I pity the buyers of Flamingo Valley - their thread has become a debating ring for definition of millionaires and what not

[Wild Falcon]

I am a CFA and working in the financial industry. I know what is net worth. I'm talking about definition of the 11% of millionaries in Singapore - that excludes the primary property - in short at least one property has to be excluded.

NET WORTH! Please google if you still unclear the definition of net worth.

[isaaclim]

Flamingo Valley is a nice project for own stay + capital appreciation. But I really don't understand the point of having studio at that location?

I asked few agents there about the targeted tenant group, but no compelling answer

[Wild Falcon]

I actually think MMs and bikini units do work in D15 Recent MMs and small units in D15 has done quite well. The reason why Flamingo Valley is not doing too well is because it has too few small units. D15 has become a MM speciality area.
==============

I have no idea why there is so much debate about my definition of millionaries. As I've said earlier, it is the definition used in the financial industry and the recent Boston Consulting findings that derives the 11.4% that gets people excited (See below). And I've already said, if you want to include property and lower the standard, then the % of millionaires is probably closer to 50% in S'pore - in short as a bro/sis has previously pointed out, any how throw a stone can also hit a millionaire if include net worth of properties.

============

An annual study by Boston Consulting Group (BCG) showed that Singapore had the highest concentration of millionaires, as in 2008. A total of 11.4 per cent of households here own more than US$1 million (S$1.4 million) - defined as those with investable assets of over US$1 million, exclusive of property and items like art.

[isaaclim]

I just google about Millionaire... This is what i found:

"Recently, there has been some controversy over how to correctly determine a person's status as a millionaire. One of the two most commonly used measurements is net worth, which counts the total value of all property owned by a household minus the household's debts. According to this definition, a household owning an $800k home, $50k of furnishings, two cars worth $60k, a $60k retirement savings account, $45k in mutual funds, and a $325k vacation home with a $250k mortgage, $40k in car loans, and $25k in credit card debt would be worth $1,085,000 (approx.) and every individual in this household would thus be a millionaire. However, according to the net financial assets measurement used for some specific applications (such as evaluating an investor's expected tolerance for risk for stockbroker ethics), equity in one's principal residence is excluded, as are lifestyle assets, such as the car and furniture. Therefore the above example household would only have net financial assets of $80,000. Another term used is "net investable assets" or working capital. These practitioners may use the term "millionaire" to mean somebody who is free to invest a million units of currency through them as broker. For similar reasons, those who market goods, services, and investments to high net worth individuals are careful to specify a net worth "not counting principal residence."

Let's start talking about millionaire... What we want is MULTI-millionaire. Then, the financial sector would not need to screen a person status with additional condition.

Let's hope the day HDB cross 1 mil mark come sonner. Then... Wah hahaha.... Multi-Millionaire!

[2824]

Receive flyer to say that there will be a mooncake party this saturday at the showflat.

Looks like they will feed you before .......

[sleek]

Yeah, so you going? Just go eat-eat and see-see!

Receive flyer to say that there will be a mooncake party this saturday at the showflat.

Looks like they will feed you before .......

[azeoprop]

Full moon, the land next door "other side" will be awaken...

"It's close to midnight and something evil's lurking in the dark
Under the moonlight, you see a sight that almost stops your heart...."

[richwang]

Now they are trying to team up with SCB. I will be visiting on Oct 15 evening. (Why they invite us in the evening?) A few questions:

1. Will the cementry be moved? Bishan used to be cementry, but people from other countries didn't know that, and just pushed the price up. Now most people have forgotten Bishan as cementry.

2. Will future, future MRT be close to it? I thought there is line to East Coast. Will the project anywhere near the line?

3. What should be a bargin price? S$1000 psf? My friend got his unit at S$900+ in the "old" days.

It is the bank's mortage unit orgnized this. So banks are also feeling the cold now.

I will also be interested to see who is still viewing units in this kind of market. I hope I won't be the few of them. Very painful for high presure selling.

Thanks,
Richard

[devilplate]

Now they are trying to team up with SCB. I will be visiting on Oct 15 evening. (Why they invite us in the evening?) A few questions:

1. Will the cementry be moved? Bishan used to be cementry, but people from other countries didn't know that, and just pushed the price up. Now most people have forgotten Bishan as cementry.

2. Will future, future MRT be close to it? I thought there is line to East Coast. Will the project anywhere near the line?

3. What should be a bargin price? S$1000 psf? My friend got his unit at S$900+ in the "old" days.

It is the bank's mortage unit orgnized this. So banks are also feeling the cold now.

I will also be interested to see who is still viewing units in this kind of market. I hope I won't be the few of them. Very painful for high presure selling.

Thanks,
Richard

wat sort of invitation is tat? got special discount ar?

[stalingrad]

wat sort of invitation is tat? got special discount ar?

I have been invited too. but I will give it a miss. I don't like cemetery view from my master bedroom. I would rather have a hdb view. can someone confirm that cemetery view is the worst, even worse than hdb view?

[proud owner]

Now they are trying to team up with SCB. I will be visiting on Oct 15 evening. (Why they invite us in the evening?) A few questions:

1. Will the cementry be moved? Bishan used to be cementry, but people from other countries didn't know that, and just pushed the price up. Now most people have forgotten Bishan as cementry.

2. Will future, future MRT be close to it? I thought there is line to East Coast. Will the project anywhere near the line?

3. What should be a bargin price? S$1000 psf? My friend got his unit at S$900+ in the "old" days.

It is the bank's mortage unit orgnized this. So banks are also feeling the cold now.

I will also be interested to see who is still viewing units in this kind of market. I hope I won't be the few of them. Very painful for high presure selling.

Thanks,
Richard

its located almost in the middle of Siglap road ... on an undulating terrace ... doubt MRT will be anywhere near there ...

[Laguna]

A land auction at Chai Wan bombed yesterday but the result probably said more about the neighbourhood than the state of the property market.
The site surrounded by tombstone workshops and six cemeteries - rather than picturesque sea or mountain view - was withdrawn by the government after it received no bids. According to traditional Chinese beliefs, living next door to a cemetery is bad luck.

SCMP - HK 30 Sept