Prime real estate market by issuing 120 leasehold
-
Government does not need to control so much lands. If lands are not so tightly controlled under 99 years' lease, so by extending leasehold to 120 years, government will still have many lands and maintain its land stock to meet various purposes.
Once this mental block is removed, Singapore 99 years' leaseholds will boom one more round as people become more receptive to buying leaseholds being primed up by 120 years to make people confident about leaseholds.
The whole market will react positively if a new concept about real estate is created by good thinkers and planners - really thinking out the box. -
How you arrived at this figure of 120?
-
99-year leasehold is a little too short as can be seen in project like Mandarin Garden, Gillman Height, Farrer Court etc where after another 10-20 years the market values begin to drop or unable to appreciate despite good locations etc.Originally posted by TooFree:How you arrived at this figure of 120?
120 years will create a certain practical buffer against bankers' and financial institutions' rule of thumb lending policies and will continue to lend to leasehold purchases even for older estates. 120 year tenure in a way will extend the investment opportunities to one-to-two generations. 99-year tenure is too thin to extend to two generation. There is a lack of sustainability in 99 year leasehold to get more sustained benefit of such leasehold.
Once government starts to issue new 120-year leasehold the signal to the whole real estate market will be very strong with 99-year leaseholders having greater confidence in continuing their purchases of leasehold and the whole property market will be boosted.
No matter what we do economically, real estate investments will continue to fuel hopes of upward mobilities for the populations. Past factors happened once in the 1970s - 1980s. These factors are purely opportunistic and economic. New opportunities for another round of real estate boom is unlikely based on economics alone. The same neighbouring countries supporting our real estate boom no longer exist. It is time to think out of the box and get Singaporeans back to confidence in their own real estates one more round. -
Ok. That is one of the way for sure. But I personally view it as a short term measure to counter any downward drop in property market and most importantly, how long can this boom substain? The height of the issue here should be on are we facing a property crisis now? If not, how about having others policy to lure buyers instead? Also, I do not see much difference between 99 and 120 except for stimulating the market. If your counter-arguement is on bankers' lending policy, then why don't we work on that instead. Lastly, in Singapore, I believe that the stance on housing is not so on luring investors but more to provide a roof for all Singaporeans.Originally posted by robertteh:99-year leasehold is a little too short as can be seen in project like Mandarin Garden, Gillman Height, Farrer Court etc where after another 10-20 years the market values begin to drop or unable to appreciate despite good locations etc.
120 years will create a certain practical buffer against bankers' and financial institutions' rule of thumb lending policies and will continue to lend to leasehold purchases even for older estates. 120 year tenure in a way will extend the investment opportunities to one-to-two generations. 99-year tenure is too thin to extend to two generation. There is a lack of sustainability in 99 year leasehold to get more sustained benefit of such leasehold.
Once government starts to issue new 120-year leasehold the signal to the whole real estate market will be very strong with 99-year leaseholders having greater confidence in continuing their purchases of leasehold and the whole property market will be boosted.
No matter what we do economically, real estate investments will continue to fuel hopes of upward mobilities for the populations. Past factors happened once in the 1970s - 1980s. These factors are purely opportunistic and economic. New opportunities for another round of real estate boom is unlikely based on economics alone. The same neighbouring countries supporting our real estate boom no longer exist. It is time to think out of the box and get Singaporeans back to confidence in their own real estates one more round. -
The government has probably recognized that people need asset enrichments and appreciation in order to carry on with retirements. So it has recently come up with new systems to allow retirees to cash out of their properties and continue to live in smaller studio flats.Originally posted by TooFree:Ok. That is one of the way for sure. But I personally view it as a short term measure to counter any downward drop in property market and most importantly, how long can this boom substain? The height of the issue here should be on are we facing a property crisis now? If not, how about having others policy to lure buyers instead? Also, I do not see much difference between 99 and 120 except for stimulating the market. If your counter-arguement is on bankers' lending policy, then why don't we work on that instead. Lastly, in Singapore, I believe that the stance on housing is not so on luring investors but more to provide a roof for all Singaporeans.
This is only one way for sure. Government through MRT and in time to come IR will also tap on new potential to enrich its coffers in order to continue to enjoy future surpluses through various land-sale schemes.
Whether the solutions to people's economy vibrancy is through real hard works of earning as much wages or possible or through property booms, it may attract different schools of thought but in the real world, IR will push up land values around towns and citizens living close by such areas and MRT will continue to enjoy some benefit.
I think solutions to our economic competitiveness should be multi-pronged, with real estates being the primary factor and government should continue to support this factor to allow citizens to continue to live from any appreciations of property values. -
Applause Robertteh... I think that is a brilliant suggestion. And yes, 120 yrs will only be a mental thingy, as we all know from precedent cases that sometimes freehold is also not very freehold in Singapore...
But there is another avenue to look at, which is the banking regulations. Banks are not so keen in lending out for properties that are less than or close to 60 yrs lease. Maybe something can be done there and it may improve the situation as well.