COE Bidding – April 2021

[emman]

48 minutes ago, Kar_lover said:

Right? What right? They can buy if they can afford it. Same as condo. If you can afford it, well and good. If not, too bad. There is no "right" here. Govt's duty is to provide alternatives (which they have) such as public transport. U can also take grab/gojek, etc. Can't afford condo (property prices are soaring too)? Buy HDB. Simple. Govt only need to control congestion by limiting COE quota (supply). The COE premium is determined by demand (customers). With such high demand driving up COE there are more than "a few" who are "rich" in sg. Btw, I have colleagues earning $10k/mth who still take public transport. Don't have car doesn't mean not rich. Don't presume that everyone who CAN own a car will WANT to own one. And for those who WANT it badly enough then they should jolly well go work for it. There is no place for entitled mindset here in sg. When people get entitled, things go south. You don't need to look far to see this where certain people get special entitlement. Just because people feel resentment doesn't mean govt is wrong. Don't always use election as threat. U think WP take over then everybody will have car, condo and can take back their CPF?? They won't dare. It will be a social disaster. 

 

Got many ways to control congestion. Pricing people out is one that doesn't sit well with me, it goes against everything car manufacturers are doing to bring prices down. Furthermore price based control ends up with one rich person with 5-6 cars in the garage that don't get driven - of course congestion is down but what a waste of quota when someone else who could really benefit from private transport is priced out.

 

If you ask me we should control driving licenses instead, maybe the reckless drivers thread will have less posts 🤔

[Throttle2]

15 hours ago, Bensky said:

Everything is relative.  To the ultra rich, what is 62k and there are tons of them around compared to the few thousand pieces of COE available at each bid.  So question is whether the system has outlived its original intent.

The system never met its original intent, or you can say that the system will always met its original intent.

the question is, what is its original intent?  Muayhahaha

[Kar_lover]

1 minute ago, emman said:

Got many ways to control congestion. Pricing people out is one that doesn't sit well with me, it goes against everything car manufacturers are doing to bring prices down. Furthermore price based control ends up with one rich person with 5-6 cars in the garage that don't get driven - of course congestion is down but what a waste of quota when someone else who could really benefit from private transport is priced out.

 

If you ask me we should control driving licenses instead, maybe the reckless drivers thread will have less posts 🤔

Car manufacturers? We are one small tiny dot to them. They bring prices down for their own benefit as competitive advantage. They don't care that they sell lesser cars in little Singapore. The COE is not a fixed price, nobody priced anyone out. It is a fixed QUANTITY. The buyers (thorought the dealers) control the "price". So it is the buyers who price each other out - survival of the fittest, as it were. And actually, 1 rich person owning 5 to 6 cars is "better" in terms of congestion cos he only drive 1 car at any one time. The COE isn't "wasted", it benefitted the community at large by having less drivers on the road lol. A collector should not be prevented from or additionally penalised for owning more cars since it is USAGE that causes congestion, not mere ownership. If everybody keep their cars at home and don't drive like during CB, the roads will be clear.

Now, i am not saying the current COE system is perfect. I feel it should be based on OMV (or at least it should be one of the factor) instead of engine capacity and/or power. It's not really fair that a MB A180 with $30k OMV and $165k selling price is in the same COE pool (Cat A) as a B&B car like Avante with $15k OMV and selling at $98k. Whereas if a manufacturer can somehow put in a high hp turbocharged engine into a sub-$20k OMV car (like MG HS), that would be their competitive advantage which our COE system eliminates by categorising them into Cat B due to more than 130hp. Cat B is even worse because it is unlimited and a $21k OMV car with 1.8L engine ends up competing for the same Cat B COE as a luxury car/supercar/etc. Yes, it might be a bit troublesome due to OMV fluctuation from shipment to shipment. But i am sure they can work something out, eg. use the OMV of the latest/previous shipment for bidding purpose. 

Don't think can implement license control la. So you mean like only release 1,000 new licensed drivers a month? Then the passing mark for driving test is the top 1,000 best driving test results? Don't forget for COE there is a 10 year turnover. So then driving license also? Every 10 years need to re-take test to "compete" for driving license? Not practical. 

 

 

[Lotr]

19 minutes ago, Throttle2 said:

The system never met its original intent, or you can say that the system will always met its original intent.

the question is, what is its original intent?  Muayhahaha

I would argue that it has met the intent of controlling number of cars with the added benefits of generating more revenue

[Mooose]

8 minutes ago, mikk123 said:

wah...thanks for the detailed response.  You are a bit extreme in your argument. I also don't want government to provide car and condo for everyone, that is communist society which doesn't even work in China. Car has been not  a luxury object since the time of henry ford. The whole world wants to make cars cheaper and affordable since there because there is a need for such mode of transport. People in other part of the world also can take bus and train to work, in fact it is better for road congestions and the environment, why then people don't?  Because rich or poor people has the right to enjoy life, including private mode of transport. Some rich and decide not to buy car? well, we don't use exceptional cases to make a point to represent all, do we? 

Then it is the original intent of COE,  Why Cat A, B, C, E and motor? Why A and B? A was intended for the average Joe out there to buy a car for family use, isn't it? B is for the rich to buy more powerful and expensive correct? so the average salary worker won't need to compete with big bosses. Now the situation has changed, there are plenty of premium expense cars fall under A leh, then for those rich who needs a 2nd , 3rd car for their wives, children, they don't mind save a bit and buy a Cat A car. 

Do you agree with that is the original intent for Cat A? Sadly, time has changed and policy remain unchanged and outdated.  While the poor has to take a 100% loan to afford a basic car, the rich can easily afford 2 or 3 more cars. 

Is this the society we want to live in? Why LKY insisted whether you live in Orchard  or Jurong, the grass on the road side must be trimmed regularly, so there is no clear differentiation between rich and poor. He knew that will divide a society. 

 

How to allocate a limited number?

I want, you want, he want, she wants ..

Need? Everyone can tell a sob story, but when they get it, they can sell it .. if limit no selling then they can privately have a scheme to lend/borrow etc for undertable reward. Biggest benefit goes to best story teller?

Lottery? Everyone bid even if dont need a car, but when they get it they can sell it .. biggest benefit goes to luckiest person?

And with either need or lottery, there will surely be a thriving black market .. 

Sure the current system is not perfect but how would you think is the best way to allocate fairly?

 

 

[Daniu82]

50 minutes ago, Throttle2 said:

The system never met its original intent, or you can say that the system will always met its original intent.

the question is, what is its original intent?  Muayhahaha

They say it's used to control the cars on the roads, but I can only see the money they collected from drivers, just like ERP charges collected from us everyday (ok lar, maybe except weekends). The cars are still as many leh. 

[boonhat_91]

37 minutes ago, Mooose said:

How to allocate a limited number?

I want, you want, he want, she wants ..

Need? Everyone can tell a sob story, but when they get it, they can sell it .. if limit no selling then they can privately have a scheme to lend/borrow etc for undertable reward. Biggest benefit goes to best story teller?

Lottery? Everyone bid even if dont need a car, but when they get it they can sell it .. biggest benefit goes to luckiest person?

And with either need or lottery, there will surely be a thriving black market .. 

Sure the current system is not perfect but how would you think is the best way to allocate fairly?

 

 

Ballot, like BTO?

Arguably a roof over the head is a more important need than private transport.

[Kar_lover]

7 minutes ago, mikk123 said:

wah...thanks for the detailed response.  You are a bit extreme in your argument. I also don't want government to provide car and condo for everyone, that is communist society which doesn't even work in China. Car has been not  a luxury object since the time of henry ford. The whole world wants to make cars cheaper and affordable since there because there is a need for such mode of transport. People in other part of the world also can take bus and train to work, in fact it is better for road congestions and the environment, why then people don't?  Because rich or poor people has the right to enjoy life, including private mode of transport. Some rich and decide not to buy car? well, we don't use exceptional cases to make a point to represent all, do we? 

Then it is the original intent of COE,  Why Cat A, B, C, E and motor? Why A and B? A was intended for the average Joe out there to buy a car for family use, isn't it? B is for the rich to buy more powerful and expensive correct? so the average salary worker won't need to compete with big bosses. Now the situation has changed, there are plenty of premium expense cars fall under A leh, then for those rich who needs a 2nd , 3rd car for their wives, children, they don't mind save a bit and buy a Cat A car. 

Do you agree with that is the original intent for Cat A? Sadly, time has changed and policy remain unchanged and outdated.  While the poor has to take a 100% loan to afford a basic car, the rich can easily afford 2 or 3 more cars. 

Is this the society we want to live in? Why LKY insisted whether you live in Orchard  or Jurong, the grass on the road side must be trimmed regularly, so there is no clear differentiation between rich and poor. He knew that will divide a society. 

 

Yes agree with you on the Cat A and B intent. The problem is the AD/PI are also very clever, they circumvent and beat the system by bringing in de-tuned and/or smaller engine cars so as to go under Cat A. Yes the situation changed from the initial stage but it is because they changed it. As i said, the COE system is not perfect. But probably any tweak that they do to it, AD/PI will still find a way to "beat" it. Such is the nature of business. 

Yes the "whole world" wants to make cars cheaper but it is for the purpose of increasing their sales and expanding their market share by tapping poorer markets which would otherwise be unable to buy their cars. Don't make them sound so nice/altruistic. Just like when Apple started making cheaper versions of iphones in order to increase their market share by trying to tap less rich customers because android phones (especially chinese ones) were being sold at small fraction of iphones. Again this is for market share not because they believe everyone has a right to own iphone. 

My point about rich people who don't drive was meant to say that driving is not a necessity, just a luxury. And luxury is never a right. Is it fair i have to live in a 3 or 4 room flat but other people can own multiple condos? Govt should allocate specific plots of land where they will sell the land to developers cheaply so that developers can then build and sell condos cheaply right? 

Lets be realistic. Society will always be divided (otherwise it would be, as u say, communism). In the office, bosses sit in rooms while rank and file sit in open area - why not every employee get a room? This is a meritocracy. You want that car, that condo, that nice office room - work for it. 

Maybe what you mean to say is that COE system has failed to ensure a more level playing field. If that is indeed what you actually mean to say, then yes i agree but as mentioned, this is caused by the ADs who are sales and profit driven beating the system and anything govt does, they will still beat it like a cat and mouse game. 

 

[boonhat_91]

23 minutes ago, Daniu82 said:

They say it's used to control the cars on the roads, but I can only see the money they collected from drivers, just like ERP charges collected from us everyday (ok lar, maybe except weekends). The cars are still as many leh. 

The best business model is one with a captive consumer base.

Keep adding and increasing fees and charges and they still keep coming back for more! Huat ah! 🤑

[emman]

55 minutes ago, Kar_lover said:

Car manufacturers? We are one small tiny dot to them. They bring prices down for their own benefit as competitive advantage. They don't care that they sell lesser cars in little Singapore. The COE is not a fixed price, nobody priced anyone out. It is a fixed QUANTITY. The buyers (thorought the dealers) control the "price". So it is the buyers who price each other out - survival of the fittest, as it were. And actually, 1 rich person owning 5 to 6 cars is "better" in terms of congestion cos he only drive 1 car at any one time. The COE isn't "wasted", it benefitted the community at large by having less drivers on the road lol. A collector should not be prevented from or additionally penalised for owning more cars since it is USAGE that causes congestion, not mere ownership. If everybody keep their cars at home and don't drive like during CB, the roads will be clear.

Now, i am not saying the current COE system is perfect. I feel it should be based on OMV (or at least it should be one of the factor) instead of engine capacity and/or power. It's not really fair that a MB A180 with $30k OMV and $165k selling price is in the same COE pool (Cat A) as a B&B car like Avante with $15k OMV and selling at $98k. Whereas if a manufacturer can somehow put in a high hp turbocharged engine into a sub-$20k OMV car (like MG HS), that would be their competitive advantage which our COE system eliminates by categorising them into Cat B due to more than 130hp. Cat B is even worse because it is unlimited and a $21k OMV car with 1.8L engine ends up competing for the same Cat B COE as a luxury car/supercar/etc. Yes, it might be a bit troublesome due to OMV fluctuation from shipment to shipment. But i am sure they can work something out, eg. use the OMV of the latest/previous shipment for bidding purpose. 

Don't think can implement license control la. So you mean like only release 1,000 new licensed drivers a month? Then the passing mark for driving test is the top 1,000 best driving test results? Don't forget for COE there is a 10 year turnover. So then driving license also? Every 10 years need to re-take test to "compete" for driving license? Not practical. 

 

 

Competitive advantage being they can sell to people on different price points, not just in SG but overseas as well yeah.

And yes, 1 person owning 5-6 cars is good for congestion, but not good for people who cars will benefit from the cars yeah. (Debatable, if you consider keeping a car in garage as benefit, I'm sure some collectors think that way). There are more ways to manage congestion also other than just charging people, like widening of roads in Punggol and Sengkang. Not sure if everyone would agree but I think some of the alternative routes added over the years have made a big impact as well (personally, MCE instead of PIE is one that I really like).

The OMV idea is very interesting, though I'm sure the luxury brands will KPKB to no end about it. I think we used to have a diff category for 1-1.6, 1.6-2 and 2+? My history not so good, not sure why that got condensed into what we currently have.

True also that license control not practical haha, I was just taking a swipe at some of the absolutely horrendous driving...

[Kar_lover]

24 minutes ago, Daniu82 said:

They say it's used to control the cars on the roads, but I can only see the money they collected from drivers, just like ERP charges collected from us everyday (ok lar, maybe except weekends). The cars are still as many leh. 

You see only what you choose to see.

If no COE and no ERP it would be even worse. Much worse. Simple logic would tell u that. I can already tell u from my own personal position that i go to office 1 hour earlier and leave 1 hour earlier to avoid the peak hour jam and therefore, ERP. I am also saving fuel and reducing pollution by not being stuck in jams. 

[Kar_lover]

1 minute ago, mikk123 said:

This world is never fair lah. Rich people and bosses are essential part of our society because they give the people job and employment. I don't dislike them, most of them make it rich because they work hard for it. 

You have pointed out rightly the car dealers are smart enough to game the system. But our ministers are not stupid you know, they can do it if they want ? ? ? 

It will be a never ending cat and mouse game la....so probably spend resources on more important non-luxury things. To use disease as an analogy, high COE is the symptom of the illness which is the demand/desire for cars. So, instead of treating the symptom (tackling high COE), more time is spent on curing the illness (i.e. reduce the demand/desire for cars) by providing more/better public transport. Once this is achieved COE won't be high anymore. Imagine one day we can work and play from home/within walking distance and every now and then when want to meet friends, public transport is good and convenient - will soooo many people really still want cars? 

[Mooose]

24 minutes ago, boonhat_91 said:

Ballot, like BTO?

Arguably a roof over the head is a more important need than private transport.

if ballot, isnt it like a lottery?

the lucky person will sell (if cannot sell lend/borrow or have some arrangement with someone else for the use of) the car ..

then benefit accrues to lucky balloter?

at least for the coe system, the money is collected and the benefit is for public good?

[Mooose]

20 minutes ago, Kar_lover said:

You see only what you choose to see.

If no COE and no ERP it would be even worse. Much worse. Simple logic would tell u that. I can already tell u from my own personal position that i go to office 1 hour earlier and leave 1 hour earlier to avoid the peak hour jam and therefore, ERP. I am also saving fuel and reducing pollution by not being stuck in jams. 

all you need is to have a ride through the city in bangkok, kl or jakarta .. or any of a number of cities that do not have congestion charge ..

yes if one thinks it is bad even with erp, it will certainly be much worse without erp ..

[Mustank]

19 hours ago, mikk123 said:

it doesn't matter. There is only one winner, our government is laughing all the way to the bank... We are all suckers paying some much $$$$ for the paper 😂

wallet is ownself one 

if for some reason ownself go and take out ownself wallet then is ownself Liao

[Atachi]

COE quota is a shifting goal post.. If it is to serve it’s intended purpose should have a hard cap. But then our population is ever growing, cough* white cough* paper. Limited supply with high demand. Only the wealthy win and above all the Govt.

[D3badge]

2 hours ago, Throttle2 said:

The system never met its original intent, or you can say that the system will always met its original intent.

the question is, what is its original intent?  Muayhahaha

COE? Luxury Tax lor another way to generate rev through people who have the “means” to pay for these “luxury tax”

 

Edited April 23, 2021 by D3badge

[cckboy]

15 hours ago, mikk123 said:

As the government it is also their duty to take care the majority who are not rich. Car is not just an luxury product only for the rich. The average joe out there have the right to enjoy private car ownership as well. If the car is exclusively to the few who are rich, people will feel resentment  and the feeling will be shown in the next election.

Everyone in Singapore have the right to buy a car, is any dealer not respecting your right here? (Provided you are not minor or in bankruptcy)