Tuesday, 31 May 2011
Monday, 30 May 2011
Property Market Crash by 2013 ?
Singapore’s Property Market Headed Towards a Perfect Storm? - [, Monday 30 May 2011 - CNBC]
This article first appeared on CNBC.com on 29 May 2011.When a country registers a 15 percent growth rate, as Singapore did last year, there is bound to be a lot of the feel good factor going around. And Singapore's housing market is cashing in on this big time -- prices have rebounded 50 percent in just two years, according to the Urban Redevelopment Authority, and cooling measures by the government have done little to calm them.
At a recent real estate conference organized by National University of Singapore, which explored the theme "Will the boom never end," Chua Chor Hoon, Head of South East Asia Research at property consultancy DTZ, said the Singapore residential market is not likely to decline much because of strong economic growth, but she also outlined a worst-case scenario, which could unfold as early as 2013-2014. "If all the ingredients come together it will make a perfect storm."
These ingredients include falling demand, more supply and higher interest rates all kicking in together.....
Thursday, 26 May 2011
Can PM Lee win over civil service sector?
Can PM Lee win over civil service sector? - [Yahoo News - FTP ]
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has to work hard to win members of the civil service over to his agenda of change, says Singapore People's Party's (SPP) Jimmy Lee.....
Lee said the reason for his sceptism is because in casual conversations he's had with civil servants, he's heard terms such as "populist measures" to describe PM Lee's recent actions.
"I believe when you put a label like 'populist measures' on an effort to change, then you don't have the mindset to change," said the former Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA) scholar.
"You are already injecting cynicism and constraining the space for possible solutions," added Lee, who himself served previously with the DSTA and the Ministry of Defence as an assistant chief information officer.
Lee believes PM Lee first has to win over the civil service -- from the ministers and superscale civil servants down to the rank and file administrators and junior and mid-level officers -- to his cause, adding that failure to do this would result in "pushback".....
TODAYonline | Voices | Create cheaper class of flats
TODAYonline Voices Create cheaper class of flats [ Letter by Eric Tan Heng Chong ].
The proposal in this letter is rather good and works like what I suggested in my posting "How To Ensure Affordable Low Cost Housing?" on 12 Feb 2010.
Better still have the HDB to manage the buying-back and re-sale of this special category of affordable "flats" created.
The proposal in this letter is rather good and works like what I suggested in my posting "How To Ensure Affordable Low Cost Housing?" on 12 Feb 2010.
Better still have the HDB to manage the buying-back and re-sale of this special category of affordable "flats" created.
Saturday, 21 May 2011
Friday, 20 May 2011
Tuesday, 17 May 2011
GE2011 — Looking Back and Peeking Ahead
GE2011 — Looking Back and Peeking Ahead - [ Sgpolitics.net - Dr Wong Wee Nam ]
[戏者，罅也。罅者，涧也。涧者，成大隙也。] 鬼谷子"When we do not pay attention to a fault line, it is going to become a small fissure. When we do not repair a small fissure, it is going to grow into a slit. If we still not take any remedial action, a big crack will soon appear and become so big that collapse becomes inevitable." Guiguzi
Monday, 16 May 2011
Making Life Easier for The Elderly - Revisited after MM Lee & SM Goh's resignations from the Cabinet
Now that both MM Lee and SM Goh had announced that they would step down from the Cabinet, what should they do? I believe the answer is best contained in my article posting on 15 Dec 2010, "Election Watch Part II - Concepts About Aging - Nanjing YY Li vs Singapore MM Lee".
Abstract
MM Lee at the old age of 87, said this during a recent constituency event; “If I'm fit, I'm prepared to stand. But whether I stand or not, that's up to the Prime Minister”. Asked if he was feeling up to it, Mr Lee chuckled and would only say: 'It's for you to judge.' [ Source : Straits Times, 14 Nov 2010 ]
SM Goh announced that the Government is carrying out a 5-year study in Marine Parade to assess the implications and needs of an ageing community. He said the elderly are a special group, and Singapore need more young people to engage older Singaporeans to help them grow old graciously ….. but “in a cost effective way”. [Source : Today, 13 Dec 2010]
As I asked in my posting on 1 May 2011, "Election Watch Part XIII - Five Years to Ruminate and To Regret or A Climate of Fear for PAP to face Aljunied GRC voters",
"will a fall of Aljunied GRC to the WP be "the last leaf falling" for MM Lee?"
Diary of A Singaporean Mind: MM & SM Leave Cabinet.: A break from the past...
Diary of A Singaporean Mind: MM & SM Leave Cabinet.: A break from the past...
Not sure whose "slap" to take? - MM, SM or "co-pilot"?
Not sure whose "slap" to take? - MM, SM or "co-pilot"?
Diary of A Singaporean Mind: Healthcare cracks as wide as Bishan River....
Diary of A Singaporean Mind: Healthcare cracks as wide as Bishan River....
Read the incomplete answer to my previous query for the MOH here :-
http://www.moh.gov.sg/mohcorp/mediaforums.aspx?id=18670
Read the incomplete answer to my previous query for the MOH here :-
http://www.moh.gov.sg/mohcorp/mediaforums.aspx?id=18670
Housing type not a fair yardstick for wealth-sharing
Housing type not a fair yardstick for wealth-sharing [ST Forum - Letter by Alena Yap (Madam)]
Monday, 9 May 2011
Post GE 2011 Comments & Impact on Property Market.
I had withheld several angry and sensitive comments to my postings in this Blog before and on Cooling-Off Day and GE Day but think it might be OK to post some of them now, since the GE is already over and the results known.
And now for my own post-GE comments.
My own earlier predictations of the GE results were actually reflected in my "red" posting "Come 8 May 2011 ..... ?" on 5 May 2011, just before Cooling-Off Day. You may recall I had posted the following statement :-
My own earlier predictations of the GE results were actually reflected in my "red" posting "Come 8 May 2011 ..... ?" on 5 May 2011, just before Cooling-Off Day. You may recall I had posted the following statement :-
(1) Will a more intelligent Electorate relinquish its hold on the steering wheel of the GRC System and let the "driver" takes you where he wants or will the passengers "slap" the driver who refuses to take a "co-driver" when the road ahead looks more enduring, if not treacherous?
I had expected the Fall of Aljunied GRC to WP as a forgone conclusion. If you had read my following postings "Election Watch Part XIII - Five Years to Ruminate and To Regret or A Climate of Fear for PAP to face Aljunied GRC voters" and "If George Yeo goes, it’s the PAP’s fault " ...
Although I had expected a little bit more than that, using Low Thia Kiang's original analogy is apt and just the WP's defeat of the PAP team in Aljunied GRC alone was enough to give the "slap" required to support my earlier thesis statement. I see it deemed fit for a re-think on our GRC System.
(2) Will homes in Hougang and Aljunied GRC get cheaper and even more affordable or will high home prices all over Singapore suddenly become "affordable" overnight for all Singaporean voters to swallow, ruminate and regret for another 5 more years?
This issue is much more interesting. What was I watching the early morning of 8 May 2011, other than the testimony of my thesis statement in (1) above? Nothing much, except would MBT had fallen like George Yeo did. If that had happened, the implications on the property market might be much wider. My own predictions for Potong Pasir, Holland-Bt Timah and other minor SMCs were just side-liners.
Now that MBT had retained his seat due to NSP's lack of strategic focus in fighting a GE, and that MBT would probably be back at MND, our thesis statement above should suffice.
Honestly, if you ask me if homes in Hougang and Aljunied GRC would simply fall in value overnight or over the next 5 years, I would not be pessimistic at all. You might have read my re-posting of the link Hougang resident angered by Eric Low’s “slum” remark. For those who have no understanding of the construction and developement business, you might feel threatened. But don't forget Low Thia Kiang's background as a "contractor" and having managed and retained his Hougang site all these years. At most, we might only expect an interim handing-over problem at Aljunied HRC and possible rude "sabotage" which Low Thia Kiang had mentioned on "Victory" Day.
For many working in the construction indutsry, there are much more "interesting" adverse tales to share than the "Protem Committee for Privatisation of HUDC Flats". Imagine mass market condo prices (99 LH prices) or even EC prices were already pushed beyond $800 psf in the North-East.....Carrots are "nothing" complex if there are public or private funds.
At most "Big Carrots" may not be planted by the PAP Govt within Hougang and Aljunied GRC by controlling funds but do you think MBT would stop milking the "land sale cash cow" and stop private developers within Hougang and Aljunied GRC if he is re-appointed back in MND?
But does it make any real difference from say Holland - Bt Timah GRC or even a more middle-class Joo Chiat SMC where "Big Carrots" are also not likely to be built other than the MRT projects which must go on especially in the context of the "present slap" by the "co-pilot" on the PAP. Such factors are already factored in the current ridiculous high property prices.
At the lower end, what will happen to HDB resale prices, not forgetting they are only leasehold flats. Can every other ordinary HDB estate take the privatisation route like Hougang N3 HUDC (Hougang Ave 7) Privatisation ? Obviously not, so must SERs go on? But are they affordable?
Obviously, the HUDC residents at Hougang were anxious to cash-out from the Privatisation exercise as each unit is expected to fetch $1.5 million. As for SERs, just look at the high prices for new units. I believe the next step of the political game for the PAP and MBT will be to put up the political argument post 2011 GE to advocate that propping up the high HDB prices (or valuation) would be necessary to allow future "cashing out" whether it is through selling back to HDB or the open market, starting with the 1960 generation of baby-boomers who has started to hit age 50 and will be 55 y.o. by the next Election in 2015 or 2016. Otherwise, the PAP must solve income stagnation and grow their CPF. If you recall what I said before, this is the "guinea pig" generation and the PAP had been buying time for the past 10 years and perhaps another 5 more years now, if the PAP still has no solution.
With MBT now returned and probably to be the MND Minister again, a "zero-sum" scenario is now as described by this letter writer to TODAY - May 9, 2011, "Asset values are not everything" - Teo Chin Ghee Jeremy. Hence, will the above "guninea pig" scenario become reality very soon and inflate the property bubble further? After all, MBT had announced he would "up" the income ceiling to $10K for eligibility to buy HDB BTO flats. That is just going to pump more air into his "Balloon"..... what about unkown other unknown policies to be crafted.
A regular visitor to this Blog, James Neo; had asked me "Is your forecast still for a 2012 bust?". You may recall I had wrote about a possible bust of the property bubble in 2012~2013. For those who are keen, I will be following up with postings on a new series, on the topic "The Property Bubble & Investment Trap - Post 2011 GE". Meanwhile, you may want to visit this Blog, who is faster than me to mention about a 2012 property bubble burst again. - "It's Safer In The Matrix - Singapore Notes".
I note there were comments to my earlier postings on "Minister Mah had not address Profits for BTO Flats and the "Ballooning" Land Costs" which I had withheld due to Cooling-Off Period or Election Day. With due respect to the commenter, he had not seen through and appreciated my costs figures in true depth. I would be releasing and addressing those comments soon under "Comments" and probably do a further posting so that readers of my Blog will clearly understand the generic mechanics of the pricing mechanism to assess if current prices are actually too high and affordable and not to be simply taken for a ride on a "property agent" or "general layman" approach for granted. After all, there are property agents who also think like our PAP Ministers-to-be-sworn-in again, that they are very worthy of Multi-million Dollar Salaries.
Has it 'suddenly become "affordable" overnight' that you have to 'swallow, ruminate and regret for another 5 more years', if you are not in Hougang or Aljunied GRC? Do follow up if you are keen on the "The Property Bubble & Investment Trap", post GE 2011.
Now that MBT had retained his seat due to NSP's lack of strategic focus in fighting a GE, and that MBT would probably be back at MND, our thesis statement above should suffice.
Honestly, if you ask me if homes in Hougang and Aljunied GRC would simply fall in value overnight or over the next 5 years, I would not be pessimistic at all. You might have read my re-posting of the link Hougang resident angered by Eric Low’s “slum” remark. For those who have no understanding of the construction and developement business, you might feel threatened. But don't forget Low Thia Kiang's background as a "contractor" and having managed and retained his Hougang site all these years. At most, we might only expect an interim handing-over problem at Aljunied HRC and possible rude "sabotage" which Low Thia Kiang had mentioned on "Victory" Day.
For many working in the construction indutsry, there are much more "interesting" adverse tales to share than the "Protem Committee for Privatisation of HUDC Flats". Imagine mass market condo prices (99 LH prices) or even EC prices were already pushed beyond $800 psf in the North-East.....Carrots are "nothing" complex if there are public or private funds.
At most "Big Carrots" may not be planted by the PAP Govt within Hougang and Aljunied GRC by controlling funds but do you think MBT would stop milking the "land sale cash cow" and stop private developers within Hougang and Aljunied GRC if he is re-appointed back in MND?
But does it make any real difference from say Holland - Bt Timah GRC or even a more middle-class Joo Chiat SMC where "Big Carrots" are also not likely to be built other than the MRT projects which must go on especially in the context of the "present slap" by the "co-pilot" on the PAP. Such factors are already factored in the current ridiculous high property prices.
At the lower end, what will happen to HDB resale prices, not forgetting they are only leasehold flats. Can every other ordinary HDB estate take the privatisation route like Hougang N3 HUDC (Hougang Ave 7) Privatisation ? Obviously not, so must SERs go on? But are they affordable?
Obviously, the HUDC residents at Hougang were anxious to cash-out from the Privatisation exercise as each unit is expected to fetch $1.5 million. As for SERs, just look at the high prices for new units. I believe the next step of the political game for the PAP and MBT will be to put up the political argument post 2011 GE to advocate that propping up the high HDB prices (or valuation) would be necessary to allow future "cashing out" whether it is through selling back to HDB or the open market, starting with the 1960 generation of baby-boomers who has started to hit age 50 and will be 55 y.o. by the next Election in 2015 or 2016. Otherwise, the PAP must solve income stagnation and grow their CPF. If you recall what I said before, this is the "guinea pig" generation and the PAP had been buying time for the past 10 years and perhaps another 5 more years now, if the PAP still has no solution.
With MBT now returned and probably to be the MND Minister again, a "zero-sum" scenario is now as described by this letter writer to TODAY - May 9, 2011, "Asset values are not everything" - Teo Chin Ghee Jeremy. Hence, will the above "guninea pig" scenario become reality very soon and inflate the property bubble further? After all, MBT had announced he would "up" the income ceiling to $10K for eligibility to buy HDB BTO flats. That is just going to pump more air into his "Balloon"..... what about unkown other unknown policies to be crafted.
A regular visitor to this Blog, James Neo; had asked me "Is your forecast still for a 2012 bust?". You may recall I had wrote about a possible bust of the property bubble in 2012~2013. For those who are keen, I will be following up with postings on a new series, on the topic "The Property Bubble & Investment Trap - Post 2011 GE". Meanwhile, you may want to visit this Blog, who is faster than me to mention about a 2012 property bubble burst again. - "It's Safer In The Matrix - Singapore Notes".
I note there were comments to my earlier postings on "Minister Mah had not address Profits for BTO Flats and the "Ballooning" Land Costs" which I had withheld due to Cooling-Off Period or Election Day. With due respect to the commenter, he had not seen through and appreciated my costs figures in true depth. I would be releasing and addressing those comments soon under "Comments" and probably do a further posting so that readers of my Blog will clearly understand the generic mechanics of the pricing mechanism to assess if current prices are actually too high and affordable and not to be simply taken for a ride on a "property agent" or "general layman" approach for granted. After all, there are property agents who also think like our PAP Ministers-to-be-sworn-in again, that they are very worthy of Multi-million Dollar Salaries.
Has it 'suddenly become "affordable" overnight' that you have to 'swallow, ruminate and regret for another 5 more years', if you are not in Hougang or Aljunied GRC? Do follow up if you are keen on the "The Property Bubble & Investment Trap", post GE 2011.
TODAYonline | Voices | Asset values are not everything
TODAYonline Voices Asset values are not everything [TODAY May 09, 2011]
Reference #01
Asset values are not everything
Reference #01
Asset values are not everything
I REFER to recent comments by Mr Mah Bow Tan and various PAP ministers on how rising property values have benefited Singaporeans and in particular, his thoughts that this is an issue for new property buyers but that once they become property owners, they will change their views.
While I support HDB upgrading because it provides for renewal and better conditions for Singaporeans, I wonder if we do not need a more nuanced view towards the benefits of rising property values.
Consider a hypothetical property market where a 1,000-sq-ft apartment appreciates in value from S$800,000 to S$1.2 million over five years because of market factors rather than physical improvements like upgrading.
A new home buyer obviously does not benefit from having to pay a higher price as this translates to higher mortgage payments, leaving less disposable income for other activities like vacations, movies and dining out.
But what about the family who purchased the apartment earlier at S$800,000, do they benefit? From a pure net worth perspective, the family is now richer but if they choose to stay in their apartment, their quality of life stays exactly the same.
If the family now decides to upgrade to a larger property in Singapore, they will make a substantial profit from the sale but by the same token, they will have to pay substantially and proportionally more for the new property they purchase because of rising overall property prices. Thus, there is no net benefit to them in this instance as well.
Indeed, the people who do benefit from rapidly rising property values are non-owner occupiers who do not need to buy an equivalent place to live in Singapore - emigrants, property developers and investors.
Unless incomes increase at the same pace as property prices, Singaporeans will spend increasing proportions of their incomes on a place to live, leaving correspondingly less disposable income for other areas.
This is a challenge not simply for first-time home buyers or for the lower income group, but for all Singaporeans aspiring for a better quality of life and is true of both public and private property owners.
I hope the Government can shift its mindset on the value of supporting property prices and look into the issues more deeply. The recent measures to cool the property market are a start but more can and should be done.
While I support HDB upgrading because it provides for renewal and better conditions for Singaporeans, I wonder if we do not need a more nuanced view towards the benefits of rising property values.
Consider a hypothetical property market where a 1,000-sq-ft apartment appreciates in value from S$800,000 to S$1.2 million over five years because of market factors rather than physical improvements like upgrading.
A new home buyer obviously does not benefit from having to pay a higher price as this translates to higher mortgage payments, leaving less disposable income for other activities like vacations, movies and dining out.
But what about the family who purchased the apartment earlier at S$800,000, do they benefit? From a pure net worth perspective, the family is now richer but if they choose to stay in their apartment, their quality of life stays exactly the same.
If the family now decides to upgrade to a larger property in Singapore, they will make a substantial profit from the sale but by the same token, they will have to pay substantially and proportionally more for the new property they purchase because of rising overall property prices. Thus, there is no net benefit to them in this instance as well.
Indeed, the people who do benefit from rapidly rising property values are non-owner occupiers who do not need to buy an equivalent place to live in Singapore - emigrants, property developers and investors.
Unless incomes increase at the same pace as property prices, Singaporeans will spend increasing proportions of their incomes on a place to live, leaving correspondingly less disposable income for other areas.
This is a challenge not simply for first-time home buyers or for the lower income group, but for all Singaporeans aspiring for a better quality of life and is true of both public and private property owners.
I hope the Government can shift its mindset on the value of supporting property prices and look into the issues more deeply. The recent measures to cool the property market are a start but more can and should be done.
PAP soul searching: the writing is on the wall surely
PAP soul searching: the writing is on the wall surely [ SpotlightOnSingapore /Roger Poh ]
Thursday, 5 May 2011
Singapore General Election - News and Issues
Singaporeans spent hundred of thousands and millions of dollars in acquiring a property (HDB or Private) but are generally apathetic towards politics.
Are you following up enough on "POLITICS" in order to shape our own political destiny and to safeguard the value of your properties?
Read about political issues and news about the coming GENERAL ELECTION at the SINGAPORE GENERAL ELECTION PORTAL (SGEP).
Read Also :
(1) CNN International's : Alexis Ong : Singaporeans just don't give a damn.
What's going on with Singaporeans? What sort of incentive do we need to care about ourselves and the people around us?
(2) My Letter published in TODAY, VOICES December 03, 2009 : Who will play countercheck role?
(3) Project Engineer Alex Tan's take on : What led Singaporeans to Apathy?
Read Also :
(1) CNN International's : Alexis Ong : Singaporeans just don't give a damn.
What's going on with Singaporeans? What sort of incentive do we need to care about ourselves and the people around us?
(2) My Letter published in TODAY, VOICES December 03, 2009 : Who will play countercheck role?
(3) Project Engineer Alex Tan's take on : What led Singaporeans to Apathy?
線香花火 NSP (Japanese Group)
Enjoy this nice song by the Japanese Group - NSP. A special THANK YOU to all for their personal comments and OPINIONS expressed through this Blog for GE 2011. All comments made by this Blog and contributors for GE 2011 and any other topics are just OPINIONS.
Come 8 May 2011 ..... ?
Come 8 May 2011, will a more intelligent Electorate relinquish its hold on the steering wheel of the GRC System and let the "driver" takes you where he wants or will the passengers "slap" the driver who refuses to take a "co-driver" when the road ahead looks more enduring, if not treacherous?
Will homes in Hougang and Aljunied GRC get cheaper and even more affordable or will high home prices all over Singapore suddenly become "affordable" overnight for all Singaporean voters to swallow, ruminate and regret for another 5 more years?
Come 7 May 2011 Election Day
Don't forget, how the hand of the "election" cards will play out depends on you too, as a member of the Electorate; and you can make it happen.
Minister Mah had not address Profits for BTO Flats and the "Ballooning" Land Costs
Minister Mah had announced that income ceiling for BTO flats may be raised to S$10,000, from S$8,000. I supposed that is, if he is voted in by Tampines GRC voters. All along, he had insisted that HDB flats are affordable. However, he has not reveal how much profits the HDB is making from selling these BTO flats.
My earlier posting on 21 April 2011, "An illegal raid on the reserves? Mr Mah Should Explain About Ballooning Land Costs", had traced the historical cost of a plot of land at the then "Clementi New Town" when the HDB acquired it in mid 1975.
On 3 May 2011, someone had provided the estimated selling prices of New SER Flats at Clementi Ave 3, here. I asked for someone to do a simple calculation to advise me what sort of profits HDB is making. There was no response, so I will do a calculation here.
Projection of Estimated Costs & Profits for BTO Flats at Clementi Ave 3
(1) 5 Rm @ 110 m2 or about 1,184 sq. ft.
Historical land costs = S$0.49 psf GFA x 1,184 = S$580.16
Present land costs, say 30 times above land costs = $580.16 x 30 = S$17,404.80
Present construction costs @ S$150 psf GFA x 1,184 = S$177,600.
Total Projected Costs = S$17,404.80 + $177,600.00 = S$195,005.
Based on the Estimated Selling Price Range ( $574,000 ~ $681,000 ),
Profit Range = ( $378,995 ~ $485,995 ) or (66% ~ 71%)
Say we allow a higher construction costs @ S$200 psf GFA x 1,184 = S$236,800.
Total Projected Costs = S$17,404.80 + $236,800 = S$254,205.
Based on the Estimated Selling Price Range ( $574,000 ~ $681,000 ),
Profit Range = ( $319,795 ~ $426,795) or (55% ~ 62%)
Or at 20% Discount of Estimated Selling Price
@ construction costs of S$150 psf GFA [Total : S$195,005 ]
Based on the Estimated Selling Price Range ( $544,000 ~ $651,000 ),
Profit Range = ( $348,995 ~ $455,995 ) or (64% ~ 70%)
@ construction costs of S$200 psf GFA [Total : S$254,205]
Based on the Estimated Selling Price Range ( $544,000 ~ $651,000 ),
Profit Range = ( $289,795 ~ $396,795) or (53% ~ 60.9%)
(2) 4 Rm @ 92 m2 or about 990 sq. ft.
Historical land costs = S$0.49 psf GFA x 990 = S$485.10
Present land costs, say 30 times above land costs = $485.10 x 30 = S$14,553.
Present construction costs @ S$150 psf GFA x 990 = S$148,500.
Total Projected Costs = S$14,553 + $148,500 = S$163,053.
Based on the Estimated Selling Price Range ( $468,000 ~ $548,000 ),
Profit Range = ( $304,947 ~ $384,947 ) or (65% ~ 70%)
Say we allow a higher construction costs @ S$200 psf GFA x 990 = S$198,000.
Total Projected Costs = S$14,553 + $198,000 = S$212,553.
Based on the Estimated Selling Price Range ( $468,000 ~ $548,000 ),
Profit Range = ( $255,447 ~ $335,447) or (54% ~ 61%)
Or at 20% Discount of Estimated Selling Price
@ construction costs of S$150 psf GFA [Total = S$163,053]
Based on the Estimated Selling Price Range ( $438,000 ~ $518,000 ),
Profit Range = ( $274,947 ~ $354,947 ) or (62% ~ 68%)
@ construction costs of S$200 psf GFA [Total = S$212,553]
Based on the Estimated Selling Price Range ( $438,000 ~ $518,000 ),
Profit Range = ( $225,447 ~ $305,447) or (51% ~ 58.9%)
Hence, for a 5-Rm at Clementi SER Flat,
(a) Without discount, estimated profit made is about 66~71% at construction costs of $150 psf GFA and 30 times historical land cost.
(b) Without discount, estimated profit made is about 55~62% at construction costs of $200 psf GFA and 30 times historical land cost.
(c) With 20% discount, estimated profit made is about 64~70% at construction costs of $150 psf GFA and 30 times historical land cost.
(d) With 20% discount, estimated profit made is about 53~60.9% at construction costs of $200 psf GFA and 30 times historical land cost.
Hence, for a 4-Rm at Clementi SER Flat,
(a) Without discount, estimated profit made is about 65~70% at construction costs of $150 psf GFA and 30 times historical land cost.
(b) Without discount, estimated profit made is about 54~61% at construction costs of $200 psf GFA and 30 times historical land cost.
(c) With 20% discount, estimated profit made is about 62~68% at construction costs of $150 psf GFA and 30 times historical land cost.
(d) With 20% discount, estimated profit made is about 51~58.9% at construction costs of $200 psf GFA and 30 times historical land cost.
As it is unlikely to incur a $200 psf GFA construction cost unless when steel price is high, it means for every 4-RM or 5-RM you purchase at Clementi Ave 3 SER, you will be giving away 1 to 2 similar HDB units to HDB depending on the percentage of discount.
This is just like COE for cars, for every car you buy, you are giving 2 cars to the LTA.
Hence, it is material for Minister Mah to address the actual construction cost and "ballooning" land cost, and not just simply avoiding the issue by pushing up the monthly income ceiling cap from S$8,000 to S$10,000, and saying it's "not cause for concern unless it isn't affordable". By assuming and taking "affordability" through stetching the mortgage over 20 to 30 years just does not make sense in the current context of wage stagnation and volatile employment market conditions.
Reference#01
TODAY May 05, 2011
"The highest price for a five-room flat in April's BTO launches was S$484,000. Will the price of BTO flats reach half a million dollars and more in future?
Mah Bow Tan: Depends on the location. If you're building one in Queenstown and in the central area, where land is more expensive, because HDB has to buy the land, it's possible. I think Singaporeans would appreciate that it's not just absolute cost alone but value for money ... If the value of a comparable private flat is higher, then it may happen. But that's not cause for concern unless it isn't affordable ... If you look at the sums ... somebody earning S$8,000 to S$9,000 will be able to afford that." .....
Mah Bow Tan: Depends on the location. If you're building one in Queenstown and in the central area, where land is more expensive, because HDB has to buy the land, it's possible. I think Singaporeans would appreciate that it's not just absolute cost alone but value for money ... If the value of a comparable private flat is higher, then it may happen. But that's not cause for concern unless it isn't affordable ... If you look at the sums ... somebody earning S$8,000 to S$9,000 will be able to afford that." .....
Reference#02
TODAY May 05, 2011
"If the income ceiling for Build-To-Order (BTO) flats is raised, National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan will be watching closely one set of figures: The average incomes of applicants for each flat type.
Based on those numbers, he will price the flats within a range they can afford. And in the long term, it will be a price range equivalent to a monthly mortgage within one-third of household income.
That is how he will manage affordability for the future, Mr Mah told Today in a one-to-one interview, two days after the surprise announcement that the income ceiling for BTO flats may be raised to S$10,000, from S$8,000." .....
Based on those numbers, he will price the flats within a range they can afford. And in the long term, it will be a price range equivalent to a monthly mortgage within one-third of household income.
That is how he will manage affordability for the future, Mr Mah told Today in a one-to-one interview, two days after the surprise announcement that the income ceiling for BTO flats may be raised to S$10,000, from S$8,000." .....
Vote for team that can serve best, says Teo
Vote for team that can serve best, says Teo [Straits Times]
But imagine this under PAP's First World Government.....Click the link below for full view.
Reference #01
Singapore will be represented at UN human rights review for the first time
http://app.mfa.gov.sg/2006/press/view_press.asp?post_id=6964
But imagine this under PAP's First World Government.....Click the link below for full view.
Reference #01
Singapore will be represented at UN human rights review for the first time
http://app.mfa.gov.sg/2006/press/view_press.asp?post_id=6964
03/05/2011 |
MFA Press Statement: Singapore’s Participation in the 11th Session of the Universal Periodic Review Working Group, UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, Switzerland, 6 May 2011 |
Mr Ong Keng Yong, Ambassador-at-Large in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, will lead an inter-agency delegation to represent Singapore at the 11th Session of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) Working Group in Geneva, Switzerland, on 6 May 2011. The UPR is a mandatory process which subjects all UN member States to a review of their human rights situation before the Human Rights Council. This will be Singapore's first UPR. During the Working Group Session on 6 May, Ambassador Ong will present Singapore's National Report and the Singapore delegation will engage in a 3-hour long interactive dialogue with UN member states of which 47 are members of the HRC and the rest are observers. Singapore welcomes the UPR process as an opportunity to exchange views with our citizens, civil society organisations and fellow UN member States on our achievements and challenges in the area of human rights. |
"Even God is voting opposition" ?
"Even God is voting opposition" [ The Kent Ridge Common ]
A series of flash floods hit areas in of Singapore yesterday - Ang Mo Kio, Bishan, Yio Chu Kang, ...
A series of flash floods hit areas in of Singapore yesterday - Ang Mo Kio, Bishan, Yio Chu Kang, ...
Wednesday, 4 May 2011
Mrs Lim HH, here's Mr Low Thia Khiang's Reply!
It is a disgrace that 2 members of the pro-term committee who were interviewed by Channel U on National TV had chosen to speak with their face "blackened" or "obscured", i.e., if they are so honourable to bring up this matter.
It is also a disgrace for the PAP to resort to such tactics mentioning lawyers' letters to cast aspersions or doubts on the WP Hougang Town Council and Aljunied GRC candidates' honesty.
Does Singapore not have a honest legal profession? If lawyers had issued letters, why lawyers had not made a complaint against the WP and Mrs Lim H H had to sound off? Does she not even trust Singapore lawyers? What about auditors? Are they also not reliable?
Is the PAP Team at Aljunied GRC so desperate that they have to stoop so low?
Is the PAP Team at Aljunied GRC so desperate that they have to stoop so low?
Reference #01
Abstracted from
Reply by Mr Low Thia Khiang (WP) to Mrs Lim H H (PAP)
Dear Voters of Pounggol East, Seng Kang West, friends and fellow Singaporeans, good evening.
We have entered a critical phrase in this election. PAP has shown its hands. They have embarked on a personal attack against me to try to discredit me. The Prime Minister has personally gone down to Aljunied GRC to campaign for the PAP team led by 2 ministers and a future speaker of Parliament, three veteran PAP heavy weight candidates. And MM Lee has also come out to make fun of our team as compared to the PAP’s.
I believe they will also make use of the media to mock me. Please be careful of what you read in news paper and what you see on TV. Please come and attend our rallies in the next 2 nights and help us to spread the message, and keep checking our web site wp.sg
First, I want to respond to Mrs Lim Hwee Hua’s accusation about Hougang Town Council’s Account. She said: “Is it messy or are they holding back till after the elections so that whoever wins Hougang will then inherit the account?”
Do you believe that Low Thia Khiang is dishonest? Do you believe that if the account of Hougang Town Council is messy, I can survive for 20 years?
The account of Hougang Town Council, like any Town Council account from the PAP, has to be audited by a public accountant who must be approved by the Ministry for National Development. After the auditor completed the audit, it has to be submitted to the Ministry for National Development and Auditor General for approval. After which, like all statutory boards, it has to be presented to Parliament and each MP can have a copy of it.
If the account is messy, how come MND and Auditor General approved it? Why is Mrs Lim, who is a minister and an MP, making this kind of comment now? She has received a copy of the report on Hougang Town Council and had not made any observations earlier. Why shoot such irresponsible comments on me now? What is she trying to do?
May I remind her as well that during the Lehman crisis, Hougang Town Council is one of those who did not lose any money! We have always handled our funds prudently.
Next, she brings in the issue of the privatization of the HUDC estate at Hougang Ave 7. She says that Hougang Town Council has not given the pro-tem committee formed for the purpose of privatization on the portion of the sinking fund balance, to be transferred to them after the privatization. This is again totally misleading.
The HUDC estate is part of the estate managed by the Town Council. The expenditure of the estate such as repainting works, reroofing works, building maintenance and other expenses are all taken in one single account under the account of Hougang Town Council which includes the HDB flats. This was what I took over from the PAP when I was elected in 1991.
Now that these blocks are to be privatized and they will manage themselves, the accounts have to be segregated, including the expense attributed to the blocks. The balance will then be transferred to their account as required on the date decided by the HDB.
This is the first time Hougang Town Council has needed to do this, we want to be sure that the account separation is done properly and we do not have experience in this area, so what did we do? Hougang Town Council wrote to HDB on 23 August 2010 after the HDB sent its briefing note to HGTC on the privatization process on 23 August 2010. We asked for advice and guidance on the method and principles we should use to separate the account as well as format for the accounts to avoid future dispute on how we have arrived at the final amount to be transferred to them.
The HDB replied to the above query on 24 Nov 2010 and said that HougangTC will have to decide on the basis of splitting the account. Hougang TC then started preparation for the process by discussing with the auditor the job scope and modification of the computer system to capture the expenditure and receivables separately.
The auditor was then appointed on 17 March 2011 and the certified apportioned sinking fund based on audited account as at 31 March 2010 was completed on 11 April 2011. HGTC is now in the process of capturing the expenditure apportioned to the HUDC estate between 31 March 2010 and 31 March 2011. Once the audited account for the HUDC estate is completed and presented to Parliament, HGTC will give a copy to the pro-term committee.
The HDB privatization briefing note to Hougang TC stated that the role of the TC is to hand over the operating and sinking fund to the Management Committee upon legal privatization. According to HDB who informed HGTC on 6 April, they have obtained the required consent for privatization but the expected duration to legally privatize the estate is 2 and half years!
I have called for a report on this issue, Hougang Town Council has given me the correspondence between the Town council and the HDB and between the pro-term committee chairman. The Pro-term committee chairman was informed of the steps HGTC has taken.
Therefore, we have done everything correctly. Why does Mrs Lim Hwee Hua decide to take up the case and suggest that the account of Hougang Town Council is messy and I, as chairman of Hougang Town Council, have done something wrong. I leave it to you to guess her intentions. Don’t you think that if I had done this, I am quite sure that I will be sued.
It is tiring during election time to deal with this kind of issue, instead of using my precious time to tell you more about Workers Party message and policies, I have to end up wasting time answering such nonsense accusations.
I will tell the PAP: if they suspect that I have done anything wrong with the account, do report me to the CPIB. Do not hookwink the voters at this critical time when polling day is near.
This is the PAP’s usual tactic: Do you still remember at the last election, the case of CCTV footage from the Election department?
All this is calculated to distract the voters and the Workers’ Party from delivering its message.
Election is a serious matter. I will be focused in the next 2 days to urge the voters to Vote Workers’ Party, towards a First World Parliament.
We have entered a critical phrase in this election. PAP has shown its hands. They have embarked on a personal attack against me to try to discredit me. The Prime Minister has personally gone down to Aljunied GRC to campaign for the PAP team led by 2 ministers and a future speaker of Parliament, three veteran PAP heavy weight candidates. And MM Lee has also come out to make fun of our team as compared to the PAP’s.
I believe they will also make use of the media to mock me. Please be careful of what you read in news paper and what you see on TV. Please come and attend our rallies in the next 2 nights and help us to spread the message, and keep checking our web site wp.sg
First, I want to respond to Mrs Lim Hwee Hua’s accusation about Hougang Town Council’s Account. She said: “Is it messy or are they holding back till after the elections so that whoever wins Hougang will then inherit the account?”
Do you believe that Low Thia Khiang is dishonest? Do you believe that if the account of Hougang Town Council is messy, I can survive for 20 years?
The account of Hougang Town Council, like any Town Council account from the PAP, has to be audited by a public accountant who must be approved by the Ministry for National Development. After the auditor completed the audit, it has to be submitted to the Ministry for National Development and Auditor General for approval. After which, like all statutory boards, it has to be presented to Parliament and each MP can have a copy of it.
If the account is messy, how come MND and Auditor General approved it? Why is Mrs Lim, who is a minister and an MP, making this kind of comment now? She has received a copy of the report on Hougang Town Council and had not made any observations earlier. Why shoot such irresponsible comments on me now? What is she trying to do?
May I remind her as well that during the Lehman crisis, Hougang Town Council is one of those who did not lose any money! We have always handled our funds prudently.
Next, she brings in the issue of the privatization of the HUDC estate at Hougang Ave 7. She says that Hougang Town Council has not given the pro-tem committee formed for the purpose of privatization on the portion of the sinking fund balance, to be transferred to them after the privatization. This is again totally misleading.
The HUDC estate is part of the estate managed by the Town Council. The expenditure of the estate such as repainting works, reroofing works, building maintenance and other expenses are all taken in one single account under the account of Hougang Town Council which includes the HDB flats. This was what I took over from the PAP when I was elected in 1991.
Now that these blocks are to be privatized and they will manage themselves, the accounts have to be segregated, including the expense attributed to the blocks. The balance will then be transferred to their account as required on the date decided by the HDB.
This is the first time Hougang Town Council has needed to do this, we want to be sure that the account separation is done properly and we do not have experience in this area, so what did we do? Hougang Town Council wrote to HDB on 23 August 2010 after the HDB sent its briefing note to HGTC on the privatization process on 23 August 2010. We asked for advice and guidance on the method and principles we should use to separate the account as well as format for the accounts to avoid future dispute on how we have arrived at the final amount to be transferred to them.
The HDB replied to the above query on 24 Nov 2010 and said that HougangTC will have to decide on the basis of splitting the account. Hougang TC then started preparation for the process by discussing with the auditor the job scope and modification of the computer system to capture the expenditure and receivables separately.
The auditor was then appointed on 17 March 2011 and the certified apportioned sinking fund based on audited account as at 31 March 2010 was completed on 11 April 2011. HGTC is now in the process of capturing the expenditure apportioned to the HUDC estate between 31 March 2010 and 31 March 2011. Once the audited account for the HUDC estate is completed and presented to Parliament, HGTC will give a copy to the pro-term committee.
The HDB privatization briefing note to Hougang TC stated that the role of the TC is to hand over the operating and sinking fund to the Management Committee upon legal privatization. According to HDB who informed HGTC on 6 April, they have obtained the required consent for privatization but the expected duration to legally privatize the estate is 2 and half years!
I have called for a report on this issue, Hougang Town Council has given me the correspondence between the Town council and the HDB and between the pro-term committee chairman. The Pro-term committee chairman was informed of the steps HGTC has taken.
Therefore, we have done everything correctly. Why does Mrs Lim Hwee Hua decide to take up the case and suggest that the account of Hougang Town Council is messy and I, as chairman of Hougang Town Council, have done something wrong. I leave it to you to guess her intentions. Don’t you think that if I had done this, I am quite sure that I will be sued.
It is tiring during election time to deal with this kind of issue, instead of using my precious time to tell you more about Workers Party message and policies, I have to end up wasting time answering such nonsense accusations.
I will tell the PAP: if they suspect that I have done anything wrong with the account, do report me to the CPIB. Do not hookwink the voters at this critical time when polling day is near.
This is the PAP’s usual tactic: Do you still remember at the last election, the case of CCTV footage from the Election department?
All this is calculated to distract the voters and the Workers’ Party from delivering its message.
Election is a serious matter. I will be focused in the next 2 days to urge the voters to Vote Workers’ Party, towards a First World Parliament.
Tuesday, 3 May 2011
Oops, Did I Make a Mistake?
My posting "An illegal raid on the reserves? Mr Mah Should Explain About Ballooning Land Costs" on 21 April 2011 has become the most popular read in this Blog.
Oops I think I am a little ill-informed, not the historial land cost back in June 1975. But the current selling price.
Look at the selling price here :- http://easyapps.sg/sgep/admin/file.aspx?id=139
Can someone help me to calculate and advise me the profit for a 5 Rm flat at Clementi Ave 3? This is just checking procedure, in case I do make a mistake.
The Deleted Video of Pathetic PAP Teo Ser Luck
The Deleted Video of Pathetic PAP Teo Ser Luck [ Singapore Election Watch ]
If George Yeo goes, it’s the PAP’s fault
If George Yeo goes, it’s the PAP’s fault [ Politics / Blog ].
The PAP Govt created 9 NCMP seats, hoping to avoid the loss of a GRC fight, and to tilt the balance of the GRC System in favour of the PAP. The writer of this article shares my thoughts on what I wrote in this Blog earlier,
It seems that the GRC system is now not just tilted only against the Opposition but also a more sophisticated Electorate. PAP should be weary of this new divide. Politics must evolve ...
Minister George Yeo should put his emotional blame on the GRC System and not the WP for making this Mother of Election Battles to grap a GRC possible. If there is no such battle, it could be Singaporeans' greatest regret in life.
It seems that the GRC system is now not just tilted only against the Opposition but also a more sophisticated Electorate. PAP should be weary of this new divide. Politics must evolve ...
Sunday, 1 May 2011
TOC speaks to a member of the audience at PAP rally ...
TOC speaks to a member of the audience at PAP rally who was ferried from the Community Centre.
MP for Tanjong Pajar Chan Chun Sing interrupts midway to greet the audience.
Election Watch Part XIII - Five Years to Ruminate and To Regret or A Climate of Fear for PAP to face Aljunied GRC voters
MM Lee warned Aljunied GRC voters to make a critical choice between "a capable PAP team" who can look after their interests and a WP team with "a limited track record" as reported in the MSM (Straits Times; 30 Apr 2011).
As reported, he warned :
"If they choose the opposition, then I say, good luck to them. They have five years to ruminate and to regret what they did. And I have no doubts they will regret it."
"At the end of the day, if you are in Aljunied, ask yourself : Do you want one MP, one Non-Constituency MP, one celebrity who has been away 30 years, and two unknowns to look after you?"
Or, he continued, did voters prefer a team that has two ministers, one potential Speaker of Parliament and two strong on-the-ground leaders?
He also noted that Aljunied voters should also ask how come homes in opposition-held Hougang were not as high in value as neighbouring places.
What do you think of MM Lee's words for Aljunied GRC which most probably would be his last for a GE as reported in the MSM?
Whilst DPM Wong had said this GE would be about "evolution" and not "revolution", MM Lee is not encouraging and leaving things to "evolution" but again trying to create a Climate of Fear against the voters in order to win votes for the PAP team.
Will the Aljunied battle and final results be just "five years to ruminate and to regret" about if the PAP team actually falls? If so, will this future five years of regret be as minor as Ms Tin Pei Ling's personal greatest regret in life so far of not bringing her parents to Universal Studio at the Sentosa IR?
Say Aljunied GRC voters fail to see the need for a "First World Parliament" and vote in favour of a PAP team to keep the status quo, will they then live with their greatest regret in life for not voting the WP when the next GE come by in 2016. By then will the so called celebrity to MM Lee, Chen Show Mao; be still available? Aljunied voters should think clearly that a "celebrity" candidate like Chen Show Mao will need time to bring about CHANGE against the PAP, for at least 2~4 terms in Parliament like what SM Goh and PM Lee are thinking for matured PAP candidate like Heng Swee Keat.
MM Lee had warned Singaporeans alike, especially Aljunied voters; about making their choice carefully.
MM Lee had warned Singaporeans alike, especially Aljunied voters; about making their choice carefully.
MM said,
"It may well happen that they win, in which case the people of Aljunied live with the results."
"The only way people learn is when they have to pay a price. From time to time we may lose, and the voters pay the price."
Is the loss of Aljunied GRC already a forgone conclusion for the PAP? Why does MM Lee shook his head when asked by Straits Times if he would visit Aljunied GRC to give the PAP team a boost. Why had he spoken about Aljunied GRC from the Tampines GRC Rally where the embattled Minister Mah is facing his Mother of GE Battles in a personal capacity in his political life? Why has the PAP announced that new candidate Heng Swee Keat is a possible Finance Minister to prop up Minister Mah?
I think the facial expressions in this scanned photo from the Straits Times tell it all, not just about the battle in Aljunied GRC but also for Minister Mah personally in Tampines GRC.
[Scanned from Straits Times 30 April 2011]
A "Climate of Fear" in facing Aljunied GRC voters?
Note : Why had MM Lee spoken about Aljunied GRC from Tampines GRC?
There is too much "political backlog" for the PAP to clear in respect of the GRC system. Is this PAP's greatest regret in this General Election, having to face a more intelligent Electorate and the new media?
Perhaps MM Lee has no courage to bid farewell to Aljunied GRC where a loss for the incumbent PAP team would testify to a "backfire", which might even spell the demise of the GRC system. Minister George Yeo should put his emotional blame on the GRC System and not the WP for making this Mother of Election Battles to grap a GRC possible. If there is no such battle, it could be Singaporeans' greatest regret in life.
MM Lee is trying to tilt the balance to give the PAP Aljunied GRC team more hope. Will his old antics in politics help to swing votes again towards the PAP, against a more sophisticated Electorate this time round or will a fall of Aljunied GRC to the WP be "the last leaf falling" for MM Lee? After all DPM Wong had declared this GE as one not about building "legacy" for the PAP but about "evolution", and not "revolution". You may note a MG Chan is already installed in Tanjong Pagar GRC in a walkover.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
