Singapore Expats Forum

Forbes article on singapore

Discuss about any latest news or current affairs in Singapore or globally. Please DO NOT copy and paste news articles from other sources without written permission.
User avatar
Barnsley
Manager
Manager
Posts: 2063
Joined: Tue, 10 Jun 2008
Location: Pasir Ris
Contact:

Postby Barnsley » Thu, 16 Jan 2014 5:52 pm

PrimroseHill wrote:SG banks from my experience thus far are quite conservative and the mortgage products on offer aren't as mind boggling and complicated as UK or US. From my experience here, there's no buy-to-let, let-to-buy, equity release, sub-prime lending, self-certification mortgage, interest only, endowment mortgage, ISA mortgages etc etc.
Its a straightforward capital+interest mortgage, 20% deposit, XYZ times salary.


I think they have something along the lines of the equity release con trick for the old folks.

Silversomething or other I believe.

Just make sure you dont live beyond the terms of the deal.
Life is short, paddle harder!!

User avatar
Wd40
Director
Director
Posts: 3788
Joined: Tue, 04 Dec 2012
Location: SIndiapore

Postby Wd40 » Thu, 16 Jan 2014 6:46 pm

Beeroclock wrote:
PrimroseHill wrote:Wow, JR8, you can actually annualise your rental yield between 10-12%? How? Teach me. The best in London is maybe 4-5% rental yield.
I was also surprised to hear that, my recollection of London was 3-5% rental yields and Australia is same....


The yields should be compared relative to FD/Bond yields. 3-5% for UK and Australia is not a lot. But for Singapore 4% is a lot considering what you get if you put it in the bank or if you were to borrow the money, the interest you would be paying on it. So bottomline SG rental yields are the best.

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Thu, 16 Jan 2014 7:01 pm

@ PrimroseHill

Unfortunately no more! When I started (early/mid 90s) you didn't look at anything under 10%, or maybe 12%, even in London. 20% was possible if you wanted hands-on rat-infested student accommodation. Of course what mustn't be forgotten is that one of the main reasons yields were so high, was precisely because of the extreme difficulty in getting finance. (ref: L&T Acts 87 and ?'95 etc, self-cert mortgages etc)

A contrast these days, is far more competitive loans. 'Recreational landlording' being far more common. The barrier between either being an owner-occupier, or a professional landlord, has well and truly gone.

The days the higher yields go hand in hand with higher-maintenance property. Housing Association, Bail Hostel etc?. [no thanks, I'm too old for that drama :)]

Yes, you are right. You might get 4-5% these days in central London. But one would hope this is with responsible professional tenants. And dare I ask how has the capital value changed these last 5 years? And how has that been geared (mortgaged)?

You might have 'only' rented at a gross yield of 5%, but plenty of landlords have seen their London property, leveraged at 70/80/90% double or triple in value over 5 years.

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Thu, 16 Jan 2014 7:07 pm

PrimroseHill wrote:I have invested in a property here, private residence. It is SIBOR+ whatever the bank charges, so, it actually comes up to around 1%. What I am paying in mortgage is what my tenant is paying for a 2bed flat. So go figure.


Figure why you're facilitating a strangers free accommodation? Yeah, I don't know why anyone would do that. Ah but hang on, are you giving the tenant a free ride, because you expect capital values to keep on rising?


PrimroseHill wrote:US interest rate will rise in 2015? Maybe.


Good heavens, what does this matter. What cashflow margin/profit are you making now, each and every month?

User avatar
Wd40
Director
Director
Posts: 3788
Joined: Tue, 04 Dec 2012
Location: SIndiapore

Postby Wd40 » Thu, 16 Jan 2014 7:20 pm

JR8 wrote:
PrimroseHill wrote:I have invested in a property here, private residence. It is SIBOR+ whatever the bank charges, so, it actually comes up to around 1%. What I am paying in mortgage is what my tenant is paying for a 2bed flat. So go figure.


Figure why you're facilitating a strangers free accommodation? Yeah, I don't know why anyone would do that. Ah but hang on, are you giving the tenant a free ride, because you expect capital values to keep on rising?




Even if the capital values don't rise and assuming rent will always equal to mortgage payment, PrimroseHill still gains, doesn't she? The tenant is paying off her loan and when she sells off the house, her profit is whatever amount has been paid off thus far by the tenant minus the interest paid to the bank minus the overheads.

In fact in other countries, rent is much much lower than the mortgage payments and there you really have to rely of capital appreciation, not so much in Singapore.

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Thu, 16 Jan 2014 8:08 pm

Wd40 wrote:Even if the capital values don't rise and assuming rent will always equal to mortgage payment, PrimroseHill still gains, doesn't she? The tenant is paying off her loan and when she sells off the house, her profit is whatever amount has been paid off thus far by the tenant minus the interest paid to the bank minus the overheads.

In fact in other countries, rent is much much lower than the mortgage payments and there you really have to rely of capital appreciation, not so much in Singapore.


Well if that's how you see it, it's not for me to teach you otherwise :)

User avatar
Strong Eagle
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10408
Joined: Sat, 10 Jul 2004
Location: Off The Red Dot
Contact:

Re: None of you have made any logical rebuttals

Postby Strong Eagle » Thu, 16 Jan 2014 11:46 pm

JR8 wrote:
Strong Eagle wrote:Income and wealth inequality are going to be the unwinding of the USA.


Maybe the USA should stop the open-door policy for poor people?

Rich people don't tend to rock the boat too hard.


That's a rather simplistic (and incorrect) view of what is happening. The USA is very good at wealth creation, not so good at wealth distribution, and the past 4 decades have seen policies that are making the situation worse.

Beeroclock
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 718
Joined: Thu, 31 Oct 2013

Postby Beeroclock » Thu, 16 Jan 2014 11:53 pm

JR8 wrote:
Wd40 wrote:Even if the capital values don't rise and assuming rent will always equal to mortgage payment, PrimroseHill still gains, doesn't she? The tenant is paying off her loan and when she sells off the house, her profit is whatever amount has been paid off thus far by the tenant minus the interest paid to the bank minus the overheads.

In fact in other countries, rent is much much lower than the mortgage payments and there you really have to rely of capital appreciation, not so much in Singapore.


Well if that's how you see it, it's not for me to teach you otherwise :)
don't forget the buy/sell costs maybe 4-5% (that's pre cooling measure), eg. buy stamp duty, sell agent comm. unless this is included in your "overheads"

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Re: None of you have made any logical rebuttals

Postby JR8 » Fri, 17 Jan 2014 12:25 am

Strong Eagle wrote:That's a rather simplistic (and incorrect) view of what is happening. The USA is very good at wealth creation, not so good at wealth distribution, and the past 4 decades have seen policies that are making the situation worse.


Well shades of grey. I see it via a Randian prism.

What is the implied responsibility to 'distribute' wealth. Do lions on the African plain distribute meat amongst themselves, and amongst neighbouring species so that all benefit. Or are men (i.e. white Americans, as the others surely aren't bothered) somehow treading a higher path.

hnnnn

User avatar
Strong Eagle
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10408
Joined: Sat, 10 Jul 2004
Location: Off The Red Dot
Contact:

Re: None of you have made any logical rebuttals

Postby Strong Eagle » Fri, 17 Jan 2014 12:49 am

JR8 wrote:
Strong Eagle wrote:That's a rather simplistic (and incorrect) view of what is happening. The USA is very good at wealth creation, not so good at wealth distribution, and the past 4 decades have seen policies that are making the situation worse.


Well shades of grey. I see it via a Randian prism.

What is the implied responsibility to 'distribute' wealth. Do lions on the African plain distribute meat amongst themselves, and amongst neighbouring species so that all benefit. Or are men (i.e. white Americans, as the others surely aren't bothered) somehow treading a higher path.

hnnnn


Yes, I am sure that we humans will do much better if we live as the lions. I don't have an answer as a solution but history shows that what is happening in the USA cannot be sustained indefinitely.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQni ... ata_player

And although this video has been criticized: http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall ... s-fallacy/

the inequality of income and wealth distribution has been increasing.

http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html


Is it because the high earners are now somehow more valuable? Or is it because the deck has been marked, the field has been tilted such that the mechanisms that gave us a robust middle class have been destroyed... everything from controls on Wall Street to unions to the minimum wage?

I say again that is trend is unsustainable, and yes, unjust.

PrimroseHill
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 368
Joined: Tue, 13 Dec 2011

Postby PrimroseHill » Fri, 17 Jan 2014 9:23 am

Perhaps I haven't been clear- my mortgage here in SG, for a house is pretty similar to what my tenants in London are paying for rent for a 2bed flat.
I agree with you, JR8, a few of friends, that have left "the city" (aka financial services) and bought some properties, central London though - all W1/W8 that sort. Interest only mortgaged, highly leveraged. Some have held on for 5years and sold and made 4/5times what they initially paid for.
I can't sleep at night if I were to do that. Husband and I don't have that risk apetite.
The rental income that at this moment in time that we can get on our house here in SG is better than what we are currently yielding in London. I am getting slightly tired of everyone saying that we are in it for the capital appreciation. It is all relative, we still need a place to live in.
Someone I know here in SG, bought a 1bed flat in Mayfair recently, newly re-decorated, paid a premium for the developers decorative taste, bought it at GBP1.1/1.2, is barely renting it out at GBP750 per week. What about the mortgage payments? In it for the capital appreciation.... really. At 1.1/1.2, a 1 bed flat, I think is too top end for the market already. Where is the capital appreciation coming from? By the same token, ABSD is at 5% here for PR, in UK houses over GBP2m is 7% as ltd company it is 15%.
BOE came out yesterday that interest rates will stay low for awhile. Well, of course. How else is the govt going to service the debt otherwise?

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Re: None of you have made any logical rebuttals

Postby JR8 » Fri, 17 Jan 2014 9:27 am

But we do live as lions, unless Darwinism is myth. You and me live in big homes with all the trimmings; whereas those less fortunate immigrants get by on sweeping the streets and living in dormitories.

I’m unclear re: ‘what is happening’ is, but perhaps it refers to income disparity. Images of revolutionary France, ‘Let them eat cake’, and all of that.

But a difference is that the French Revolution was an early example of popular anti-establishmentarianism. The bloody French are perpetually revolting, it seems ;

I have no problem with income disparity. I have some dazzling genius friends who earn mind-boggling millions – I think their success is wonderful. I have friends who have ‘lowly’ career jobs such as a tube-train driver, and my room-mate from school is a homosexual bus driver in Brighton (apparently! (yes, it DOES add to the overall picture)). I think the adage that wealth brings happiness is untrue: It’s more about expectations, and how life’s expectations get set, and met.

Are high earners ‘more valuable’? hahaha... loaded with implied guilt there :) Who even suggested this? Oh, you.

Why do the poor seek to migrate to '''unjust’’’ (in your terms) societies, and are they all fools for doing so?
Last edited by JR8 on Fri, 17 Jan 2014 9:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

PrimroseHill
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 368
Joined: Tue, 13 Dec 2011

Re: None of you have made any logical rebuttals

Postby PrimroseHill » Fri, 17 Jan 2014 9:33 am

JR8 wrote:But we do live as lions, unless Darwinism is myth. You and me live in big homes with all the trimmings; whereas those less fortunate immigrants get by on sweeping the streets and living in dormitories.

I’m unclear re: ‘what is happening’ is, but perhaps it refers to income disparity. Images of revolutionary France, ‘Let them eat cake’, and all of that.

But a difference is that the French Revolution was an early example of popular anti-establishmentarianism. The bloody French are perpetually revolting, it seems ;

I have no problem with income disparity. I have some dazzling genius friends who earn mind-boggling millions – I think their success is wonderful. I have friends who have ‘lowly’ career jobs such as a tube-train driver, and my room-mate from school is a homosexual bus driver in Brighton (apparently! (yes, it DOES add to the overall picture)). I think the adage that wealth brings happiness is untrue: It’s more about expectations, and how life’s expectations get set, and met.

Are high earners ‘more valuable’? hahaha... loaded with implied guilt there :) Who even suggested this? Oh, you.

Why do the poor seek to migrate to ‘’’unjust’’’ (in your terms) societies?

Too much, JR8, way too much. It is Friday afterall

PrimroseHill
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 368
Joined: Tue, 13 Dec 2011

Postby PrimroseHill » Fri, 17 Jan 2014 9:37 am

I really do not care one way or another if a friend is a tube driver, bus drivers or CEO of RBS.
Just not into those with chips on their shoulders or the world owes them.

Back to the subject at hand. Is Singapore heading for a meltdown?

User avatar
ScoobyDoes
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1649
Joined: Wed, 29 Nov 2006
Location: A More Lucky Spot

Postby ScoobyDoes » Fri, 17 Jan 2014 9:46 am

PrimroseHill wrote:.....CEO of RBS.
.
.
Back to the subject at hand. Is Singapore heading for a meltdown?



Sorry, I would care......means he's a twat :lol:

Meltdown, yes I think so unless this place can really get to grips with higher efficiency and doing more with less and better people.

Immigration shouldn't be the only answer to higher GDP.
'When Lewis Hamilton wins a race he has to thank Vodafone whereas in my day I used to chase the crumpet. I know which era I'd rather race in.'

SIR Stirling Moss OBE


  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Latest News & Current Affairs”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests