-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
New developments to share
- Thread starter wuqi256
- Start date
what??? Bangladesh?? TOP 2???
How to avoid investing in a ghost town?
Do not buy when it is empty.
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50142079n
Do not buy when it is empty.
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50142079n
Iskandar works on two key principles of displacement: (1) Singaporean retirees being displaced by inflation and congestion brought on by recent 7-8 years of overzealous immigration policy and poor infrastructure planning. It is very painful and hard to reverse the social effect and the new white paper on population is still pointing to a positive population growth rate. As long as the growth rate is positive, the growth rate in Iskandar will be positive. (2) Companies being displaced by higher rental and labour costs. The greedy REITS and landlords and restriction in blue collar workers hiring will force more companies to move overseas. In short, the situation in JB is not worrying at the moment but do watch out for condo quantity bubble. I expect something similar in the video to happen in the next 2-3 years.
New buyers do not need to be so creative.
Just buy where the crowd is.
I wonder Legoland is still drawing crowd by 2014.
Just buy where the crowd is.
I wonder Legoland is still drawing crowd by 2014.
Posted on March 2, 2013 - Investment.
BUYERS BEWARE
By CHANG KIM LOONG
An erroneous understanding of the matter exists in the housing development industry, much to the dismay of purchasers having disputes with developers.
FREEBIES have been advertised and offered to woo purchasers to buy developers’ property because choices are now in abundance though pricing is on the exorbitant side.
Some of the freebies include air-conditioners, kitchen cabinet, automatic gate, club membership and legal fees. The list is not exhaustive as property development is a competitive game.
However, among the freebies offered to purchasers, legal fees require objective analysis. The freebie on legal fees normally appears in sale brochures and advertisements as “free legal fees” or “legal fees borne by developer” or words to that effect.
Now, what is “free legal fees”? Is it a freebie in the truest sense of the word?
Meaning of free legal fees
Generally, “free legal fees” would mean that the developer will pay for the legal fees on the S&P (sale and purchase) agreement. However, the offer of free legal fees may not cover disbursements such as stamp duties, searches fees, registration fees, printing charges, purchase of documents costs, etc. The purchaser will have to pay for them.
In other words, the offer of “free legal fees” would in its plain and obvious meaning suggests that the legal fees the purchaser would have to pay to the solicitor would instead be paid by the developer. It would, therefore, be understood that if the purchaser had appointed a solicitor, the developer would pay for the solicitor’s fees.
However, is this what happens actually when a purchaser buys property from a developer who offers “free legal fees”?
What happens actually is quite different. An erroneous understanding of “free legal fees” exists in the housing development industry, much to the dismay of purchasers having disputes with developers.
Developer’s solicitor
In offering “free legal fees”, the developer would recommend to the purchaser a law firm on the developer’s panel to attend to the S&P agreement and its related transaction. Correspondingly, the same law firm will be tasked with the loan documentation as a packaged deal. If the purchaser chooses that law firm, the developer will supposedly absorb the legal fees. Quite obviously, the developer takes the view that such arrangements represent a cost-saving to the purchaser as well as facilitate and expedite dealings.
Now the irony is the solicitor of the law firm attending to the sale and purchase agreement would not normally scrutinise the agreement for the purchaser to understand in layman language, but would say that it is a standard agreement’. Instead, the solicitor would ensure that the developer’s rights and interests in the agreement are intact and the purchaser duly signs the agreement and thus, is bound by it.
From a legal point, the solicitor acting in such a manner would actually be acting for the developer. The solicitor is therefore the developer’s solicitor, and this being the case, the developer would have to pay the solicitor’s fees. Therefore, there is nothing free about it as far as the purchaser is concerned. It can only be considered free if the buyer receives independent legal representation and does not have to pay for it.
Hence, there is no solicitor acting for the purchaser to scrutinise and protect the purchaser’s rights and interests in the agreement. The purchaser is without legal representation. Since the purchaser has no solicitor acting for the purchaser in the agreement, there is no legal fees for the purchaser to pay.
Unfortunately, many purchasers realise this rather late in the day.
The purchaser normally realises this fact when a dispute arises and the purchaser asks the solicitor for help and is informed that the solicitor who attended to the sale and purchase agreement is actually the developer’s solicitor.
Purchaser’s solicitor
What would happen if the purchaser appoints another solicitor who is not on the developer’s panel of solicitors to attend to the sale and purchase agreement? How would the offer of “free legal fees” be affected?
In principle, the solicitor so appointed will scrutinise the sale and purchase agreement for the purchaser. The solicitor will act for the purchaser and consequently there are legal fees for the purchaser to pay the solicitor.
In this situation, the developer and purchaser will each have their respective solicitors. Each party will have solicitor’s fees to pay.
If the developer’s offer of “free legal fees” were taken seriously, the developer would have to pay for the purchaser’s solicitor’s fees. It is arguable that the developer’s offer of “free legal fees” is broad enough to cover such a situation. The purchaser would therefore be entitled to claim on the offer and have the developer pay for the purchaser’s solicitor’s fees.
However, most developers would refuse to pay for the purchaser’s solicitor’s fees. The reason given normally for the refusal is that the offer of “free legal fees” is subject to the condition that the purchaser chooses the solicitor on the developer’s panel of law firm to attend to the S&P agreement.
When this happens, the developer’s offer of free legal fees would seem hollow and the developer may possibly be exposed to being sued for misrepresentation and damages.
Legal Profession Act
Section 84 of the Legal Profession Act 1976, stated that a solicitor who acts for the developer in the sale of property under a housing development must not act for the purchaser in the same transaction.
Furthermore, under the sale and purchase agreement, namely Schedule G and Schedule H, the developer and purchaser must pay its own solicitor’s costs.
The above laws clearly suggest that the developer’s solicitor must not act, or purport to act, for the purchaser. The purchaser has a right to appoint his/her solicitor. Each party bears its own solicitor’s costs.
Thus, is the developer’s offer of “free legal fees” legal? Readers should ponder on the arguments.
The reality
Meantime, two situations would possibly arise from the developer’s offer of “free legal fees”.
First, where the purchaser is unrepresented by a solicitor in the S&P agreement, the offer of “free legal fees” is not really “free” because the purchaser has no solicitor acting on his behalf. There is thus no legal fees to pay.
Second, where the purchaser is represented by a solicitor in the S&P agreement, he has a solicitor acting on his behalf and thus has legal fees to pay. The developer would be bound to honour the offer of “free legal fees” and pay the solicitor’s fees or possibly risk being sued for mispresentation and damages.
In reality, most developers fail to honour the offer of “free legal fees” in the second situation. Instead, the purchaser is asked to pay the solicitor’s fees and is informed that the offer only applies if the purchaser chooses the solicitor on the developer’s panel to attend to the S&P agreement.
In summary, is “free legal fees” fact or myth? I leave that for your pondering and own conclusion.
Hopefully, the next time you buy a property from a developer and read about “free legal fees” or words to that effect, you would remember reading this article and exercise your rights accordingly.
What are the prevalent legal fees in property transaction when you buy from a housing developer? Are legal fees discounted for standardised S&P or housing loans)
In a case where the purchase transaction is governed by the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act, 1966 (HDA transaction), or where a loan is obtained to finance a HDA transaction, the following lower scale of fees will apply:
● RM250 if purchase price or the loan sum (as the case may be) is RM45,000 or below;
● 75% of the applicable scale fee specified above, if the purchase price or the loan sum (as the case may be) is above RM45,000 but not more than RM100,000;
● 70% of the applicable scale fee specified above, if the purchase price or the loan sum (as the case may be) is above RM100,000 but not more than RM500,000; and
● 65% of the applicable scale fee specified above, if the purchase price or the loan sum (as the case may be) is in excess of RM500,000.
(See table for a simplified version of formula for the fees scale.)
Why must you use your own lawyer?
The first rule of conveyancing is “buyer and seller must engage own lawyer”. Consult a lawyer right from the start and not after you have paid the deposit. The reason being, under the law you are deemed to have read and understood every document you have signed.
Furthermore, promises made by the seller or someone else about the deal may not be enforceable if the promises are not in writing unless you are able to provide proof of the same.
A lawyer cannot represent both the vendor and purchaser. If you are using the vendor’s panel lawyer, often, when disputes happen, the lawyer is unlikely to represent you against their bigger client.
A lawyer in a general practice will be able to complete your purchase; however, lawyers with a focused real estate/conveyancing practice may prove a better choice if you are unsure of what to do, or have complications in your purchase agreement or mortgage. While you may think that you cannot afford the services of your own lawyer, consider whether you can afford not to.
BUYERS BEWARE
By CHANG KIM LOONG
An erroneous understanding of the matter exists in the housing development industry, much to the dismay of purchasers having disputes with developers.
FREEBIES have been advertised and offered to woo purchasers to buy developers’ property because choices are now in abundance though pricing is on the exorbitant side.
Some of the freebies include air-conditioners, kitchen cabinet, automatic gate, club membership and legal fees. The list is not exhaustive as property development is a competitive game.
However, among the freebies offered to purchasers, legal fees require objective analysis. The freebie on legal fees normally appears in sale brochures and advertisements as “free legal fees” or “legal fees borne by developer” or words to that effect.
Now, what is “free legal fees”? Is it a freebie in the truest sense of the word?
Meaning of free legal fees
Generally, “free legal fees” would mean that the developer will pay for the legal fees on the S&P (sale and purchase) agreement. However, the offer of free legal fees may not cover disbursements such as stamp duties, searches fees, registration fees, printing charges, purchase of documents costs, etc. The purchaser will have to pay for them.
In other words, the offer of “free legal fees” would in its plain and obvious meaning suggests that the legal fees the purchaser would have to pay to the solicitor would instead be paid by the developer. It would, therefore, be understood that if the purchaser had appointed a solicitor, the developer would pay for the solicitor’s fees.
However, is this what happens actually when a purchaser buys property from a developer who offers “free legal fees”?
What happens actually is quite different. An erroneous understanding of “free legal fees” exists in the housing development industry, much to the dismay of purchasers having disputes with developers.
Developer’s solicitor
In offering “free legal fees”, the developer would recommend to the purchaser a law firm on the developer’s panel to attend to the S&P agreement and its related transaction. Correspondingly, the same law firm will be tasked with the loan documentation as a packaged deal. If the purchaser chooses that law firm, the developer will supposedly absorb the legal fees. Quite obviously, the developer takes the view that such arrangements represent a cost-saving to the purchaser as well as facilitate and expedite dealings.
Now the irony is the solicitor of the law firm attending to the sale and purchase agreement would not normally scrutinise the agreement for the purchaser to understand in layman language, but would say that it is a standard agreement’. Instead, the solicitor would ensure that the developer’s rights and interests in the agreement are intact and the purchaser duly signs the agreement and thus, is bound by it.
From a legal point, the solicitor acting in such a manner would actually be acting for the developer. The solicitor is therefore the developer’s solicitor, and this being the case, the developer would have to pay the solicitor’s fees. Therefore, there is nothing free about it as far as the purchaser is concerned. It can only be considered free if the buyer receives independent legal representation and does not have to pay for it.
Hence, there is no solicitor acting for the purchaser to scrutinise and protect the purchaser’s rights and interests in the agreement. The purchaser is without legal representation. Since the purchaser has no solicitor acting for the purchaser in the agreement, there is no legal fees for the purchaser to pay.
Unfortunately, many purchasers realise this rather late in the day.
The purchaser normally realises this fact when a dispute arises and the purchaser asks the solicitor for help and is informed that the solicitor who attended to the sale and purchase agreement is actually the developer’s solicitor.
Purchaser’s solicitor
What would happen if the purchaser appoints another solicitor who is not on the developer’s panel of solicitors to attend to the sale and purchase agreement? How would the offer of “free legal fees” be affected?
In principle, the solicitor so appointed will scrutinise the sale and purchase agreement for the purchaser. The solicitor will act for the purchaser and consequently there are legal fees for the purchaser to pay the solicitor.
In this situation, the developer and purchaser will each have their respective solicitors. Each party will have solicitor’s fees to pay.
If the developer’s offer of “free legal fees” were taken seriously, the developer would have to pay for the purchaser’s solicitor’s fees. It is arguable that the developer’s offer of “free legal fees” is broad enough to cover such a situation. The purchaser would therefore be entitled to claim on the offer and have the developer pay for the purchaser’s solicitor’s fees.
However, most developers would refuse to pay for the purchaser’s solicitor’s fees. The reason given normally for the refusal is that the offer of “free legal fees” is subject to the condition that the purchaser chooses the solicitor on the developer’s panel of law firm to attend to the S&P agreement.
When this happens, the developer’s offer of free legal fees would seem hollow and the developer may possibly be exposed to being sued for misrepresentation and damages.
Legal Profession Act
Section 84 of the Legal Profession Act 1976, stated that a solicitor who acts for the developer in the sale of property under a housing development must not act for the purchaser in the same transaction.
Furthermore, under the sale and purchase agreement, namely Schedule G and Schedule H, the developer and purchaser must pay its own solicitor’s costs.
The above laws clearly suggest that the developer’s solicitor must not act, or purport to act, for the purchaser. The purchaser has a right to appoint his/her solicitor. Each party bears its own solicitor’s costs.
Thus, is the developer’s offer of “free legal fees” legal? Readers should ponder on the arguments.
The reality
Meantime, two situations would possibly arise from the developer’s offer of “free legal fees”.
First, where the purchaser is unrepresented by a solicitor in the S&P agreement, the offer of “free legal fees” is not really “free” because the purchaser has no solicitor acting on his behalf. There is thus no legal fees to pay.
Second, where the purchaser is represented by a solicitor in the S&P agreement, he has a solicitor acting on his behalf and thus has legal fees to pay. The developer would be bound to honour the offer of “free legal fees” and pay the solicitor’s fees or possibly risk being sued for mispresentation and damages.
In reality, most developers fail to honour the offer of “free legal fees” in the second situation. Instead, the purchaser is asked to pay the solicitor’s fees and is informed that the offer only applies if the purchaser chooses the solicitor on the developer’s panel to attend to the S&P agreement.
In summary, is “free legal fees” fact or myth? I leave that for your pondering and own conclusion.
Hopefully, the next time you buy a property from a developer and read about “free legal fees” or words to that effect, you would remember reading this article and exercise your rights accordingly.
What are the prevalent legal fees in property transaction when you buy from a housing developer? Are legal fees discounted for standardised S&P or housing loans)
In a case where the purchase transaction is governed by the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act, 1966 (HDA transaction), or where a loan is obtained to finance a HDA transaction, the following lower scale of fees will apply:
● RM250 if purchase price or the loan sum (as the case may be) is RM45,000 or below;
● 75% of the applicable scale fee specified above, if the purchase price or the loan sum (as the case may be) is above RM45,000 but not more than RM100,000;
● 70% of the applicable scale fee specified above, if the purchase price or the loan sum (as the case may be) is above RM100,000 but not more than RM500,000; and
● 65% of the applicable scale fee specified above, if the purchase price or the loan sum (as the case may be) is in excess of RM500,000.
(See table for a simplified version of formula for the fees scale.)
Why must you use your own lawyer?
The first rule of conveyancing is “buyer and seller must engage own lawyer”. Consult a lawyer right from the start and not after you have paid the deposit. The reason being, under the law you are deemed to have read and understood every document you have signed.
Furthermore, promises made by the seller or someone else about the deal may not be enforceable if the promises are not in writing unless you are able to provide proof of the same.
A lawyer cannot represent both the vendor and purchaser. If you are using the vendor’s panel lawyer, often, when disputes happen, the lawyer is unlikely to represent you against their bigger client.
A lawyer in a general practice will be able to complete your purchase; however, lawyers with a focused real estate/conveyancing practice may prove a better choice if you are unsure of what to do, or have complications in your purchase agreement or mortgage. While you may think that you cannot afford the services of your own lawyer, consider whether you can afford not to.
Nothing is free.
Actually I thought long and hard before investing in Iskandar. It is MY after all - land of the grey areas, moving goal posts and 3rd world efficiency. But if MY is not all these then it's property prices would not be this low. Know what I mean? Even though my investment in Iskandar is small, it still worries me cos the developer has taken sgd20k from me as deposit at the soft launch but I hafta wait till April or May before they can give me a S&P agreement to sign! This won't happen in SG. In a nutshell, if MY is like SG then it would be priced like SG.
So at the end of the day, it's a combination of guts, brains and heart/emotions. If you don't believe in the Iskandar or if you do not have the holding power or if your sixth sense tells you to stay out, then you better stay out. Few things are more important than being able to sleep in peace at night.
I have a HUGE risk appetite. I love risks. But I also believe in the macroeconomics of Iskandar (as well as global money flows, etc). I see ppl and businesses being displaced in SG. Like it or not, SG ppl and money will flow into Iskandar. It always has except that this time it will come as a roaring river. And the biggest beneficiaries are the JB ppl. They in turn will have more disposable income and the local economy will start having a life of its own...if you know what i mean. Even the Malays in JB speak English now. (it was a shock to me!) and they do that cos they know the money is coming.
and the JB girls turn their noses at me now! So what if you are Singaporean? So what if you have money? JB ppl have money now! I used to see a JB gir's eyes twinkle when she knows that I (a SG boy) is keen on asking her out. I used to see her cheeks blush with a mixture of happiness and shyness. It is no longer the case now. Come to think of it, it is kind of ironic that I used to be able to get girls to go out with me when I had nothing and now that I am worth a little bit of money, girls avoid me like the plague. Anyway I digress.
The little bit of nonsense i wrote above was to share with fellow investors (or non-investors) my reasons for investing in PH. Investing in MY is not without it's risks. There are tons of it! In fact, security (the shortage of) is my biggest fear. But the way I see it, the upside is bigger than the downside.
Just to share a short story before I go. My neighbors, family and friends never told me about their investment plans, except for my mum of cos. and when I did a cheeky little act saying I went to Bt Indah the other day and it looked really interesting... Blah blah blah... The next thing I know, I have friends telling me that they already bought early last year, a few relatives then told me they are exploring, a public listed CEO invited me along for a land survey, etc... So what I am saying is that more ppl than you know actually already have a foothold in JB, they are just not telling you. Why? Cos they don't wanna look like a fool if Iskandar fails, after all these ppl can afford a few hundred K. But if Iskandar takes off, you can bet your bottom dollar on how boastful they would become because they were there first! It's a face thing. It's a Singapore thing.
You know what? I believe Iskandar will take off successfully, and sooner rather than later. And when its success comes full circle, SG will face another bout of problems. But I am not at liberty to disclose it now. Maybe I will another day but I am late for my driving range.
Its always good to have alternative voices.
Thanks for some of the PMs but I would humbly suggest not to bother these days as some are just coming back under another nick and will just disappear anytime their stories are questioned. Some are just doing their due dilligence to keep our highways less congested and we should appreciate them for that.
To those who been here long enough, they should know how to read between the lines and be able to see and guage for themselves whether it is worth the risks and for those who cannot take any risks at all, its better they just continue staying where they are.
Prof, watch this space.
Uncle Wuqi, not buying already as I use rapid fire mode in JB Sentral. Now moving my radar back to KLCC.
I promise my wife a holiday home in KLCC, but delay for 7 years due to bull run in Singapore.
Now that the bull in Singapore and KL take a break, it is time to fulfill my promise.
Any Suggestion? Or start a Living in KLCC thread.
Lots of exciting stuff coming. Understood, yes there is already a KL thread on this forum. Feel free to contribute there. Will make it a sticky
Thanks for sharing. I also wonder if many buy as weekend homes or invest but cannot rent then will it be a good thing?
Deputy PM Muhyiddin Yassin, addressing the Chinese community at a luncheon in Batu Pahat yesterday, said: "In the past, businessmen preferred to do business in Kuala Lumpur, but now South Johor, under Iskandar Malaysia, has been attracting billions of ringgit worth of investments... Now, I have been informed that all the taukay (bosses) and top guns in the business world are bringing in projects into the state", adding that the Government was aware that the four key issues that concerned the Chinese community mainly were economic growth, education, security and stability, and social order.
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2013/3/6/nation/12796112&sec=nation
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2013/3/6/nation/12796112&sec=nation
Got this info from my broker. Been buying into rowsley on his recommendation .
Iskandar: AmFraser organized a two day working visit with investors to Iskandar.
Notes, robust land deals totaling ~RM 2b have been driving positive sentiment, including,
i) CapitaLand’s JV with Iskandar Waterfront Holdings (IWH) for Danga Bay devt,
ii) Singapore’s Ascendas Land has inked a landmark deal to help build an integrated technology park over 210 ha in Gerbang Nusajaya, in a 60/40 JV with UEM Land.
iii) Singapore’s Peter Lim and UEM Land to co-develop an Auto City within Gerbang Nusajaya on a 270 acre piece of land.
iv) Private Singaporean developer, Link (THM) bought a 5.9ha plot of land at RM 151 psf, mooted for a mixed devt hub called Media village@ Medini Iskandar, comprising residential and retail properties.
v) Four Msian corporate figures joining forces for a high-end devt in Puteri Harbour
During the visit, Fraser noticed stronger-than-expected occupancy rate (~70%) within Nusujaya, especially East Ledang and Horizon Hills. Singaporeans, PRs and expats have come in droves since a yr ago, motivated by,
- series of tightening measures in Spore, i.e additional buyers’ stamp duties, higher LTV, min cash down-payment, etc., and
- opening of education institutions.
Of note, Marlborough College, Southampton University and Legoland have commenced operations.
Other catalysts for the theme include,
- proposed listing of IWH
- possible listing of Medini Iskandar
- increasing big name participation from both Singapore, Chinese and Msian entities
Fraser believes UEM is a key beneficiary, being the master developer, particularly at Gerbang Nusajaya. Other players with a growing presence include, Sunway, SP Setia, Mah Sing, E&O and WCT Land.
In Singapore, Rowsley remains the most direct proxy to play the Iskandar theme. The stock is at $0.505, breaking past the $0.50 resistance, and at a new all time high.
Iskandar: AmFraser organized a two day working visit with investors to Iskandar.
Notes, robust land deals totaling ~RM 2b have been driving positive sentiment, including,
i) CapitaLand’s JV with Iskandar Waterfront Holdings (IWH) for Danga Bay devt,
ii) Singapore’s Ascendas Land has inked a landmark deal to help build an integrated technology park over 210 ha in Gerbang Nusajaya, in a 60/40 JV with UEM Land.
iii) Singapore’s Peter Lim and UEM Land to co-develop an Auto City within Gerbang Nusajaya on a 270 acre piece of land.
iv) Private Singaporean developer, Link (THM) bought a 5.9ha plot of land at RM 151 psf, mooted for a mixed devt hub called Media village@ Medini Iskandar, comprising residential and retail properties.
v) Four Msian corporate figures joining forces for a high-end devt in Puteri Harbour
During the visit, Fraser noticed stronger-than-expected occupancy rate (~70%) within Nusujaya, especially East Ledang and Horizon Hills. Singaporeans, PRs and expats have come in droves since a yr ago, motivated by,
- series of tightening measures in Spore, i.e additional buyers’ stamp duties, higher LTV, min cash down-payment, etc., and
- opening of education institutions.
Of note, Marlborough College, Southampton University and Legoland have commenced operations.
Other catalysts for the theme include,
- proposed listing of IWH
- possible listing of Medini Iskandar
- increasing big name participation from both Singapore, Chinese and Msian entities
Fraser believes UEM is a key beneficiary, being the master developer, particularly at Gerbang Nusajaya. Other players with a growing presence include, Sunway, SP Setia, Mah Sing, E&O and WCT Land.
In Singapore, Rowsley remains the most direct proxy to play the Iskandar theme. The stock is at $0.505, breaking past the $0.50 resistance, and at a new all time high.
Crescendo banks on Iskandar boom
Mar 6, 2013 - PropertyGuru.com.my
By Farah Wahida:
The rapid development in Iskandar Malaysia will benefit Crescendo Corporation Bhd, a Johor-based property developer with a landbank of 3,000 acres, said HwangDBS Vickers Research Sdn Bhd in a report.
Apart from its sizeable landbank, the company has huge exposure to Johor’s industrial segment, making it an ‘undiscovered gem’, according to The Borneo Post.
“With pure exposure to Johor, Crescendo is one of the most leveraged to rising land prices in Iskandar Malaysia; every one percent increase in the average land price would lift revised net asset value (RNAV) by 0.7 percent.”
“New initial public offerings (IPOs) of large Iskandar Malaysia beneficiaries could re-rate Malaysia’s property sector and spur interest in Crescendo,” noted the research unit.
Moreover, 15 percent of Crescendo’s landbank or 440 acres are intended for industrial purposes, including Nusa Cemerlang Industrial Park in Nusajaya, wherein Singaporeans comprise 56 percent of the investors.
The appetite for industrial land also remains strong despite the sharp price increase, said the research house, pointing out that industrial land in Nusajaya is currently priced at RM40 psf, up from RM24 psf in 2009.
In addition, “Crescendo is gradually shifting its focus from industrial to higher-yielding residential and commercial projects. Industrial projects constituted 63 percent of its completed projects but only 47 percent of its launch pipeline.”
Along this line, Crescendo’s property sales are expected to remain resilient as most of its residential projects intended for locals are landed properties that are affordably priced, HwangDBS added.
Farah Wahida, Editor of PropertyGuru, wrote this story. To contact her about this or other stories email [email protected]
Mar 6, 2013 - PropertyGuru.com.my
By Farah Wahida:
The rapid development in Iskandar Malaysia will benefit Crescendo Corporation Bhd, a Johor-based property developer with a landbank of 3,000 acres, said HwangDBS Vickers Research Sdn Bhd in a report.
Apart from its sizeable landbank, the company has huge exposure to Johor’s industrial segment, making it an ‘undiscovered gem’, according to The Borneo Post.
“With pure exposure to Johor, Crescendo is one of the most leveraged to rising land prices in Iskandar Malaysia; every one percent increase in the average land price would lift revised net asset value (RNAV) by 0.7 percent.”
“New initial public offerings (IPOs) of large Iskandar Malaysia beneficiaries could re-rate Malaysia’s property sector and spur interest in Crescendo,” noted the research unit.
Moreover, 15 percent of Crescendo’s landbank or 440 acres are intended for industrial purposes, including Nusa Cemerlang Industrial Park in Nusajaya, wherein Singaporeans comprise 56 percent of the investors.
The appetite for industrial land also remains strong despite the sharp price increase, said the research house, pointing out that industrial land in Nusajaya is currently priced at RM40 psf, up from RM24 psf in 2009.
In addition, “Crescendo is gradually shifting its focus from industrial to higher-yielding residential and commercial projects. Industrial projects constituted 63 percent of its completed projects but only 47 percent of its launch pipeline.”
Along this line, Crescendo’s property sales are expected to remain resilient as most of its residential projects intended for locals are landed properties that are affordably priced, HwangDBS added.
Farah Wahida, Editor of PropertyGuru, wrote this story. To contact her about this or other stories email [email protected]
Iskandar prob isn't e cheapest or most logical place for business. Many investors cld b thinking all e companies in SG r relocating to JB. I dun think this is e case. B careful of getting stuck w empty commercial n industrial units.
Rumoured among prop agents in SG tt SG might b implementing another round of cooling measure to peg loan to ur income. End of story for investors there. If implemented there might b three effects. First, upgraders will b locked to their current house n there is no way to become rich via prop investment. This group will invest in JB. Two, more prop agents will have to market JB prop to survive, which means more vibrnt developer direct, owner resale n subsale, n rental activities. Three it caps e growth rate of SG prop, forcing bigger investors to come to JB. V positive news for my JB prop but it will hit my SG prop in terms of cap appreciation.
If we want to be optimistic, we could think that the govt's intention is to curb price hike due to speculation. It does not curb price hike due to genuine economic growth and productive activities. With Malaysia, IM in particular as a hinter land for Singapore, I believe Singapore govt already restrategized it's economic plans. It could now accept investments which are more resource intensive, (hitherto it rejects due to Singapore's internal constraints), with high value activities and management to be based in Singapore and the resource intensive part in IM. This coupled with the migrations of existing investments under high cost pressure to IM would further cut overall business costs in Singapore, thus enhancing its competitiveness. Thus I believe prop prices would still be supported in Singapore with more high valued economic activities, minus raging speculations. My thoughts bar unforeseen circumstances of course. This way, Sgd would continue to hold it value if not further strengthening.
Similar threads
