Jump to content

Singapore property price by mkt forces? my foot!


Relacklabrudder
 Share

Recommended Posts

URA rejects sole bid for Paya Lebar site

04:47 AM Nov 05, 2011

SINGAPORE - The Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) has rejected the only bid submitted by the subsidiaries of UOL Group and Singapore Land for a commercial site at Sims Avenue / Tanjong Katong Road because the price is too low.

 

UOL Venture Investments and SL Development had submitted a joint bid of S$529.3 million, or about S$566 psf per plot ratio, for the 99-year leasehold site.

 

"We are very disappointed that the tender has not been awarded. We were looking forward to a constructive role in the Government's long-term plan to decentralise commercial activities outside of CBD which will help ease business costs, reduce undue congestion and revitalise urban nodes," the consortium said in a joint statement. "The rejection is a setback to that decentralisation plan."

 

It said the bid had been a fair one considering "the site's technical challenges and resultant impact on layout, as well as the recent global economic turbulences and enhanced market risks".

 

"The rejection came as a surprise to us

↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites

Aiyoh... why they so careless this time round ? Dirty trick exposed ... Oohh I know, because only 1 bidder hor... I also interest to know their contract work, if only 1 bidder, will they reject also if the price too high since they always say they don't go for the lowest bidder?

Link to post
Share on other sites

how can one bidder give high price? only one supplier command high price.

it hints merely the truth of the cause of the price hike here. Talk c,,k till so loud. Action shows the fact.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Supercharged

Stupid SOP is they always want 3 quotations for everything they want to purchase or tender out.

 

It's dumb. 3 quotations dont mean the prices are fair and value for money

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

yeap, can sell 85% above reserve price but not 15% below.... nothing wrong though as that is how auction operates. some oversupply comcerns too, that is why commercial REIT unit prices are under some pressure recently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

all big organisation including bank sometime will kelong... once i was a only bidder for an auction car but the banker say too low n refused to release. I called her n guess wat she told me.... it was lower than our existing loan amount & cannot explain to boss later. Doesn't this sound familar to this land deal [laugh]

 

To me is fcuking greed... tat piece of s--t is so near geylang they expect $1000 per square feet. [:p]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Turbocharged

all big organisation including bank sometime will kelong... once i was a only bidder for an auction car but the banker say too low n refused to release. I called her n guess wat she told me.... it was lower than our existing loan amount & cannot explain to boss later. Doesn't this sound familar to this land deal [laugh]

 

To me is fcuking greed... tat piece of s--t is so near geylang they expect $1000 per square feet. [:p]

Auction have minimum reserve price. nothing wrong. u mean if u only bidder with $1, the bank also must sell to u?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Auction have minimum reserve price. nothing wrong. u mean if u only bidder with $1, the bank also must sell to u?

 

Of course, we bid above the min price lah.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Supercharged

Auction have minimum reserve price. nothing wrong. u mean if u only bidder with $1, the bank also must sell to u?

 

It's GREED, bro.......

 

GREED causes our prices of COE, flats, transport to be where they are now.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

So garhmen want inflated property prices fueled by inflated property prices. While other countries trying to reign in inflation. Is tis responsible actions?

 

Besides property prices wat about COE? If next time bid $2 Coe, lta say too low , a keen to raiding reserves how?????

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mah says low prices is like raiding the reserves...

 

This fellow is trying to defend his screw ups that cause HDB prices to increase.

If selling land at low prices means raiding the reserves, then next time sell land must ask for president's permission already.

Also might as well hold the land infinite since the land value will appreciate further a few more years down the road. Isn't it the same as "raiding the reserves" if the gov sells the land now?

 

Good thing Mr Horse is out, I can expect him to come out with another policy to tax the land owners for "reserves protection tax" that goes exponential as the value of the land increases annually. In a way, the tax will always remain in the gov coffers as if the land is sold at present. This is on top of the property tax. Mr Cow better not come up with this idea.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So garhmen want inflated property prices fueled by inflated property prices. While other countries trying to reign in inflation. Is tis responsible actions?

 

Besides property prices wat about COE? If next time bid $2 Coe, lta say too low , a keen to raiding reserves how?????

 

Land Policy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Vsion/Ngiam_Tong_Dow

 

Housing 85 per cent of the population in 900,000 flats is no mean achievement by the HDB. Few know that the cornerstone of our vast low-cost housing programmes is the Land Acquisition Act. The Act allows the State to acquire private land for public purpose at pre-development prices. Dr Goh asked me, then a young officer, to draft the Cabinet memorandum proposing that the compensation to be paid for land acquired exclude its potential value.

 

We saw no reason why landlords should benefit from public infrastructural investment in roads, drainage, sewerage, power and water pipelines, etc. We would pay only the market value of raw land before public development. Our policy discouraged land speculation. The development charge imposed for change of use falls within the same concept. In effect, the State creamed off about half the potential value.

 

Sadly, the clarity of thought shown by Dr Goh in pricing land was lacking in more recent years. Relying on the concept of opportunity cost, the Chief Valuer, at the behest of either the Ministry of National Development or the MTI (I am not sure which), valued land with Raffles Place land as the benchmark. The assumption is that every square metre of land in any part of Singapore has the potential to be Raffles Place.

 

The excerpt was taken from this book

http://www.infibeam.com/Books/info/Ngiam-T...997169350X.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...