Singapore income tax highest in the world???
-
Hi "stupidissmart", so we cross path again.
If 50,000 people were to demand from a Dealership that has dared to only successfully bid for a quota allocation of 500 cars - in a SUPPLY side scheme - do you think it will be a good PR exercise for the Dealership to get around this “difficulty” by holding a balloting exercise to determine who will be the lucky 500 new owners ?
Like I mentioned, this idea and the solutions offered may not be the final and best approach, but at least it beats the stupidity of paying the peak price of $50,000 PLUS for a piece of paper called COE, just to own a vehicle for only TEN YEARS.
Is it so difficult to stretch the STUPIDITY of this idea - of SUPPLY side control - with a SMART change in perspective ?
Why do you insist on having to participate in a COE bidding system that is NOT TRANSPARENT, and with the bid prices being suspiciously manipulated when convenient or to suit some agenda ?
Have you not noticed that each time when a fleet of taxis - (from any one of the GLC owned taxi companies) - is due for replacement, the COE will co-incidentally come sliding down to levels that are up to $10,000 lower then normal.
If you believe that being “stupid is smart” surely this stupid idea is also a smart idea as an alternative to the COE system ?
Or do you believe that being honest and admit the creativity of a new idea can damage your credo of “stupid-is-smart” ? -
I never say anything about dealership in regard to balloting. As I say many times before, tat is stupid idea, making the ownership chain only longer. Read carefully below.
The gov will hold a ballot for the owner themselves to ballot it out. The application form for each ballot come in $100 or watever the gov want, and the people, if they wanna increase their chances, can buy more application form and try out their luck (tis is to prevent people from using other people IC to ballot). Of course if they got the ownership, they cannot transfer their ownership and have to get a car by tis month. (to avoid investors since it is only to themselves, tis time). There can be another alternative to those who must absolutely get their car within tis month. They get to pay the full COE, or a fixed min price fixed by gov.
U haven't say anything about preventing people from investing in COE in your case since now ownership can be transferable, neither has u say anything about wat happened when there is an over bidding from the dealership in your case. U fail to answer any of my questions, why will I be satisfied with your suggestions ? Frankly I do not see any value added in your proposal. Please answer these 7 issues I have stated down to convince me.
1) If 50000 bids from dealers for 5000 gov quota, who get to have the 5000 ownership ? Those who bid more or they have go to ballot box again
This is a very crucial question, please answer it. If u don't it means your argument doesn't hold any water as tis is the source of Gov problem, demand is more than supply.
2)If dealer sell 700 cars tis month, they will certainly bid for 1000 COE if one must bid in denominators of 500. I won't aim to sell 500 as I can easily sell 700. I will want to increase my profits isn't it. Thus overbidding will occurs easily. I can use my spouse's, parent's IC to bid to avoid the issue of being charged more for extra bidding isn't it ? If u need a car dealership license, I will register a car dealership business with my spouse's name and again use it to buy ownership. To register a business now take about $100 only.
3)If 500 people band together to buy 500 COE, using one person name, then won't it be the same case as the normal COE we use ?
4)If dealer really buy in $10000 per COE from the gov tat month, we will expect them to sell at $15000 isn't it ? Can u blame them ? They r taking risks in buying COEs isn't it, thus should expect a profit as they may iccur a lose too. Wat if tat store is the only store tat sell mercedes, or watever brand and model in Singapore ? They will then have more flexibility in charging the price of COEs isn't it ?
5) wat if again 5000 potential car owners wanna buy the 500 COE from a dealer. How does he decide who get to have the ownership ? He of course will give the ownership to people tat had bid in more money, as dealers r profit orientated isn't it ? How do u stop tat ?
6) in such a case, then won't tat seems to be like investing ? I will buy the COE, keep till it reaches a high price and sell it off to earn a profit. Tat will only make things worse for car consumers in Singapore. How do u prevent tat ?
7) And lastly, another thing which u avoid to answer, is why deprive Gov from collecting COE ? They in the end will spend the same and will seek to increase tax from other areas which will affect everyone, including the poor. Isn't COE a good way to tax people ?
If it is a lousy idea, face it and humbly step down. -
The very idea of a NON-TRANSPARENT COE bidding system is abhorrent, and my reply as to why the SUPPLY SIDE control mechanism with a fixed LOWER BASE PRICE is more advantageous has been quite clearly explained.Originally posted by stupidissmart:I never say anything about dealership in regard to balloting. As I say many times before, tat is stupid idea, making the ownership chain only longer. Read carefully below.
The gov will hold a ballot for the owner themselves to ballot it out. The application form for each ballot come in $100 or watever the gov want, and the people, if they wanna increase their chances, can buy more application form and try out their luck (tis is to prevent people from using other people IC to ballot). Of course if they got the ownership, they cannot transfer their ownership and have to get a car by tis month. (to avoid investors since it is only to themselves, tis time). There can be another alternative to those who must absolutely get their car within tis month. They get to pay the full COE, or a fixed min price fixed by gov.
U haven't say anything about preventing people from investing in COE in your case since now ownership can be transferable, neither has u say anything about wat happened when there is an over bidding from the dealership in your case. U fail to answer any of my questions, why will I be satisfied with your suggestions ? Frankly I do not see any value added in your proposal. Please answer these 7 issues I have stated down to convince me.
The OBJECTIVE of the COE system is a CONTROLLED growth of the car population, which has now TURN OUT to be a MONEY SPINNER for the Government, and hurting the Singaporean Car Owners, who have NO CHOICE but to submit themselves to an ARTIFICIALLY IMPOSED ENVIRONMENT.
Need I go further to address the supposedly Government promoted merits that you seem to have been deeply infatuated with.
That is the trouble with the present COE bid system, in which the Dealership is left with the option to pay up the balance of the COE NOT WITH THE BID.
1) If 50000 bids from dealers for 5000 gov quota, who get to have the 5000 ownership ? Those who bid more or they have go to ballot box again This is a very crucial question, please answer it. If u don't it means your argument doesn't hold any water as tis is the source of Gov problem, demand is more than supply.
2)If dealer sell 700 cars tis month, they will certainly bid for 1000 COE if one must bid in denominators of 500. I won't aim to sell 500 as I can easily sell 700. I will want to increase my profits isn't it. Thus overbidding will occurs easily. I can use my spouse's, parent's IC to bid to avoid the issue of being charged more for extra bidding isn't it ? If u need a car dealership license, I will register a car dealership business with my spouse's name and again use it to buy ownership. To register a business now take about $100 only.
In a SUPPLY SIDE control mechanism - if you had take the care to read clearly - the Dealership will have to pay immediately on successful award of the quota that he had bid for.
The Dealership will have to plan carefully his cash flow, capital cost, existing stock against future stock positions and sales, and a whole host of consideration; where at present the entire cost is passed onto the Car Owners desperately willing to be subjected to a NO-CHOICE situation.
The difference with the COE system is that the buyers money is involved while the Dealership only pay a token fee at bidding time. In a SUPPLY SIDE situation the Dealership will have to pay for the FULL AMOUNT UP FRONT when the quota is awarded.
3)If 500 people band together to buy 500 COE, using one person name, then won't it be the same case as the normal COE we use ?
4)If dealer really buy in $10000 per COE from the gov tat month, we will expect them to sell at $15000 isn't it ? Can u blame them ? They r taking risks in buying COEs isn't it, thus should expect a profit as they may iccur a lose too. Wat if tat store is the only store tat sell mercedes, or watever brand and model in Singapore ? They will then have more flexibility in charging the price of COEs isn't it ?
Who is to stop the Dealership from making a quick buck with the SUPPLY SIDE quota bid price ? At least, the mark-up will be from a lower base price instead of 5-digits being paid for a COE.
Did you even bother to read my earlier post before your reply ?
5) wat if again 5000 potential car owners wanna buy the 500 COE from a dealer. How does he decide who get to have the ownership ? He of course will give the ownership to people tat had bid in more money, as dealers r profit orientated isn't it ? How do u stop tat ?
Did you not read about the balloting that the Dealer can exercise ? What is to stop the Dealership from taking on more then one quota lot ?
Again, the SUPPLY SIDE quota system will require the Dealership to pay the full value of his bid price on the successful award of the quota amount bidded. In such a situation, speculative instinct will be moderated, as the interest paid on capital spent for the quota bid price will have to be considered. What is there to prevent the bid price from falling (similarly in the COE system) ? Will the Dealership dare to speculate with a SUPPLY SIDE quota control system ?
6) in such a case, then won't tat seems to be like investing ? I will buy the COE, keep till it reaches a high price and sell it off to earn a profit. Tat will only make things worse for car consumers in Singapore. How do u prevent tat ?
Are you sure you are speaking for the benefit of every car owner in desiring the Government from collecting a recurring windfall with every batch of COE being released ? How sure are you that every cent collected goes to pay for all the good of all Singaporeans ?
7) And lastly, another thing which u avoid to answer, is why deprive Gov from collecting COE ? They in the end will spend the same and will seek to increase tax from other areas which will affect everyone, including the poor. Isn't COE a good way to tax people ?
Ask again if the COE was intended to be a TAX COLLECTION MECHANISM when it was first initiated ?
Glad to see that you no longer address this idea as being "Stupid" but have promoted it to a level of being "Lousy", not so sure if it is being "smart" on your part to do so.
If it is a lousy idea, face it and humbly step down.
Like I have mentioned, this is not the FINAL and END-ALL SOLUTION, but an alternative idea to the COE system which is NON-TRANSPARENT, and is now being manipulated by the Government against its ORIGINAL OBJECTIVE of using it to CONTROL THE GROWTH OF THE CAR POPULATION in Singapore.
The Government is increasing the COE Quota with every exercise, because the revenue collected is so lucrative. -
Originally posted by nismoS132:car tax is 100% necessary.
unless you wish to have traffic like bangkok.
infact, i'm more for increasing the costs of owning a car.
i recently read a bk that said that if all companies introduced Flexitime, it would solve all traffic problems, rendering measures like COE n ERP unnecessary. think abt it, that makes *alot* of sense. fi everyone went to work at different times (and had different free times), there would be fewer cars on any one road in any one time. thus, i think that instead of increasing car tax and road tax, gahmen shud try increasing the number of companies carrying out Flexitime. after all, everything in this world is related.
the (young and enthusiastic) pikamaster
"a butterfly flapping its wings gently in China creates a gale in Canada."
-some ancient traditional saying -
I think u r the one tat fail to read clearly bah, from your stupid reply of telling me your idea again. If u really like to personally attack my nick, and if u really seems to have nolstagic for the word 'stupid' , I will peppered the use of it up in here so tat it is more suitable for u
First, wat make u think the dealership r so poor as they can't afford to buy in the cheaper version of COE ? They can afford to buy in cars, they can afford the many squre feet of showroom and people, wat make u think they cannot come up with $50,000, or $100,000 if need be ? I think their renovation come up to at least a 100 thousands ! As I have said, they will buy according to how much cars they sold per month. If they sell 700, they will order 800 COE isn't it ? They have to raise tat money through bank through loans watever if they really do not have the cash. Don't tell me because if they can't afford it, then buy in only 50 right ! Isn't tat stupid ? Then they just had to work for 3 days tat month and close shop as they sell out all the COE,and had to wait till the next COE bidding day !!!
All your stupid crap just keep rotating about tis big assumption tat u have. The demand will be lesser than the supply set by quota. Can u 100% say tat it will always happen ? Wat fiance sort of crap is just plain crap as wat I have explained earlier, they fixed the number of COE bought by their sale volume. If quota cannot fulfil the demand of bidders, which it highly likely will, then wat is your solution ? Please don't come up with answer such as "it won't happened lah because bla bla bla". Lets say it happened already, wat r u going to do ? Answer it to the point ! How does Gov do its selection !
In the end, if without using the ballot box, the quota sent to Gov will still rise due to high demand, and in the end they will charge a high price to dealer and in the end they will pass the cost to the consumer. Wat u have done is just add another link to the chain, another rung of ladder for the consumer. U in fact just increase the complications and the coffers of the dealer. Tis will make other poeple invest in COE too, which they will push up the price,increasing the demand of COE. Gov will have to raise the price again since demand is greater now. Wat have your stupid idea come to ? Higher COE !
U better read point 2 again. If I need to buy in more quota lot, I will not just use my name but my relatives', employees' name, my spouse name to buy ownership too. Then won't it forfeit your stupid idea of charging more for additional lots u buy ?
Another argument against your stupid fixed quota size. If a brand mitsubishi sell 700 cars a month, and he deicded to buy only 500 COE because they will be "overcharged" from your great idea previously, while BMW sell 300 a month and force to buy 500 COE as there aren't any other smaller denominators suggested by u again. Suppose I wanted to buy a mitsubish. But in the end I was turned down as it has ran out of COE, I will be forced to buy BMW tat month isn't it ? Does your fixed quota make any sense then ?? If I am importing Porche, importing a or 2 car per month, how much lots should I buy then ?
Read point 5 carefully again,
Why will dealer ever choose balloting when he can go for aunctioning tat will give him more profit ? They r profit orientated isn't it ? Business is meant to make money, they r not here doing charity. Only can Gov to do such things direct to car owners,as wat I have suggested previously.
U really underestimate the potential of dealing with COE. Singapore definitely will have people buying cars right ? And the demand will be much greater than the quota given by Gov. The real price will definitely be higher than the "proposed" lower price u want the gov to set. The demand for COE will be the push factor for maintaining the price. Paying upright may be very difficult to u, but there r tons of rich guys around in Singapore using money to buy property, shares and etc. If your only deterent is just having a large capital, then I have to say it won't work. If the return is high, no matter how much the price is, people will invest in it. In the case u r really stupid, there r people investing hundreds of thousands to a mere business plan just to have the hope of getting back the money in a matter of many years, and the risk of losing it all is very great. I don't see why they will not buy the relatively safer COE for investment instead. If Gov quota is 5000, and each cost $1000, I think it is easy to monopolise the market using the many relatives' IC approach, needing only just $5 million dollars in capital. U again think tat is huge ? Then u really have to start work in a fiance company boy.
Why is the COE not open and transparent to u ? The price is really paid by how much they bid, and the expected price is shown on the net everyday. Wat part is invinsible to u ? R u going to ask from Gov for something not practical again ?
The idea is not about how the Gov spend tax money, it is about if Gov should use tis method to gather tax money. Do u think tis is a bad way of taxing ?
U feel tat the money is not well spent by Gov when it collect COE as tax. U think u will do a better job ? From your stupid suggestion for COE, I can see how good your problem solving ability is. Your suggestion has no value added in it, creating more problems and u refuse to face tat point. Go back, read my 7 points again and reply instead of re-telling everyone wat your idea is all about again. Please answer my first point. This is third time I ask u to reply tat question.
Frankly I can not even see a single advantage nor any feasibility compared to the old COE method. Too much loop holes and not well thought, I think u better start from formula again. -
You say that "Don't tell me because if they can't afford it, then buy in only 50 right ! Isn't tat stupid ? Then they just had to work for 3 days tat month and close shop as they sell out all the COE,and had to wait till the next COE bidding day !!! "Originally posted by stupidissmart:I think u r the one tat fail to read clearly bah, from your stupid reply of telling me your idea again. If u really like to personally attack my nick, and if u really seems to have nolstagic for the word 'stupid' , I will peppered the use of it up in here so tat it is more suitable for u
First, wat make u think the dealership r so poor as they can't afford to buy in the cheaper version of COE ? They can afford to buy in cars, they can afford the many squre feet of showroom and people, wat make u think they cannot come up with $50,000, or $100,000 if need be ? I think their renovation come up to at least a 100 thousands ! As I have said, they will buy according to how much cars they [b]sold per month. [/b][/quote]
Hi “stupidissmart”, I am wondering if our relationship is star crossed, but no regrets even if it is. There is nothing personal about your nick, except that the position that you have adopted – time and again – seems to be that you are living up to your credo (that being stupid is really smart ! ) .
Why do you say "First, wat make u think the dealership r so poor as they can't afford to buy in the cheaper version of COE ?" Are you referring to my SUPPLY SIDE quota as the CHEAPER version of COE ? Are you objecting because it is cheaper than what you are accustomed to pay for NORMAL COE ?
No where in my post have I suggested that the dealership will be too poor (nor will they ever be so un-resourceful not to follow the creative methods that you have listed to obtain the funds) “to buy in the cheaper version of COE” – (which I presume that you are reluctant to mention as SUPPLY SIDE quota system ? ) .
However, if you read my points again, I did say that they will have to consider their bid prices very carefully, as they will have to pay up front – (on successfully being awarded the quota lot according to their successful bid price) – when compared to the present situation where the Dealership need only pay $100 for the application form, and pay the balance of the COE price on completion of the car transaction.
There is little risk on the side of the Dealership for the COE prices that they bid on behalf of the Car Buyer.
Certainly, the Dealership can afford to buy in cars, pay for showrooms, and employ dozens of sales persons, and come up with more funds to pay for the quota in a SUPPLY SIDE quota system.
The point is that this time around, every quota lot that is successfully tendered by a Dealership will have to be paid for UPFRONT, which will add to the cost of the cars that are brought into stock.
Certainly, the Dealership will plan their preferred quota lot size according to how many cars they sell per month – (as you and I have mentioned).
If they sell 700, they will order 800 COE isn't it ? They have to raise tat money through bank through loans watever if they really do not have the cash. Don't tell me because if they can't afford it, then buy in only 50 right ! Isn't tat stupid ? Then they just had to work for 3 days tat month and close shop as they sell out all the COE,and had to wait till the next COE bidding day !!!
My question to you: - can the COE system of a monthly fixed quantity of 5000 certificates be sufficient for a monthly demand of 10,000 buyers through 300 car dealerships – (all numbers are ASSUMPTIONS similar to your hypothetical numbers) ?
With the present COE system, the Buyers have to DEPEND on the DEALERSHIP to place the “correct
“ COE price, and the Government is aided by a supposedly “INDEPENDENT” Public Auditing Company to ensure the “confidentiality” of the COE process. There is little or no transparency as to which fools have placed the bids at such high prices of $50,000 PLUS (as had happened before) .
If a Dealership sell 700, and they will order 800 cars in a SUPPLY SIDE quota system, then they will run the risk of having to pay IMMEDIATELY the cost of the quota for the ADDITIONAL 100 cars to be brought into stock – over and above the 700 that they would normally sell per month.
Will any Dealership risk doing so, when the quota price may be available lower in the next bidding exercise in a SUPPLY SIDE quota system ?
If they can afford it, I did not say that a Dealership need to buy only 50 cars, instead of buying 800 cars, when they can sell 700 cars – (if I get the drift of your confused position correctly) .
In my SUPPLY SIDE quota system, the OBJECTIVE is to control the growth of the car population, as the Government has indicated the objective to be for its "Normal" COE system.
So whether if it is in a DEMAND SIDE – (Normal COE quota system) - or SUPPLY SIDE (your Cheaper COE quota system) is being followed, any Dealership will just have to wait till the next month when all the cars (or COE) are sold out according to what are the number of cars allotted to be sold in either systems for a given period.
So what is your problem in accepting either one of the systems that serves the OBJECTIVE of controlling the GROWTH of the VEHICLE POPULATION ? Do you prefer the NORMAL COE and reject the CHEAPER COE version (SUPPLY SIDE quota system) ?
[quote]
All your stupid crap just keep rotating about tis big [b]assumption tat u have. The demand will be lesser than the supply set by quota. Can u 100% say tat it will always happen ? Wat fiance sort of crap is just plain crap as wat I have explained earlier, they fixed the number of COE bought by their sale volume. If quota cannot fulfil the demand of bidders, which it highly likely will, then wat is your solution ? Please don't come up with answer such as "it won't happened lah because bla bla bla". Lets say it happened already, wat r u going to do ? Answer it to the point ! How does Gov do its selection ! [/b]If you can set aside trying to be smart while being stupid, and try to be objective then perhaps you will understand that all proposal will have to follow certain assumptions, until the reality of any situation prove such assumptions in a proposal to be right or wrong.
Nowhere did I write in my SUPPLY SIDE quota control system that DEMAND will be LESSER than SUPPLY.
How on earth did you read this into my post ?
Read again the purpose of the DEMAND SIDE quota control through the COE system, or the SUPPLY SIDE quota control system – they both are meant to CONTROL the GROWTH of the VEHICLE POPULATION. -
Your statement that “In the end, if without using the ballot box, the quota sent to Gov will still rise due to high demand, and in the end they will charge a high price to dealer, and in the end they will pass the cost to the customer”.
In the end, if without using the ballot box, the quota sent to Gov will still rise due to high demand, and in the end they will charge a high price to dealer and in the end they will pass the cost to the consumer. Wat u have done is just add another link to the chain, another rung of ladder for the consumer. U in fact just increase the complications and the coffers of the dealer. Tis will make other poeple invest in COE too, which they will push up the price,increasing the demand of COE. Gov will have to raise the price again since demand is greater now. Wat have your stupid idea come to ? Higher COE !
U better read point 2 again. If I need to buy in more quota lot, I will not just use my name but my relatives', employees' name, my spouse name to buy ownership too. Then won't it forfeit your [b]stupid idea of charging more for additional lots u buy ? [/b]
You have described the very OBJECTIVE that the SUPPLY SIDE quota control system is trying to ACHIEVE - that is to PREVENT HIGH COST, as stated in your remark about "CHEAPER VERSION OF COE".
The present COE system is a ballot box system. The quota “sent” (not sure who will sent this as said by you) to the Government is already increasing with each COE tender exercise – and is NOT MEETING the OBJECTIVE of the COE (or DEMAND SIDE) vehicle population control.
The dealer is pushing the COE price higher, as they try to grab any COE available ON BEHALF of the Car Buyer (your customer), as it is the Car Buyer who will pay for the COE when the bid is successful. So I am not sure how you get the idea that the Dealership is passing the COE cost to the customer (?) since the Car Buyer is already being forced by a COE system to pay UP FRONT for the COE price.
If you can remove your prejudiced thinking and stop trying to kill the SUPPLY SIDE proposal WITHOUT FULLY UNDERSTANDING the various statements made, then you will see that there is NO ADDITIONAL “RUNG OF LADDER FOR THE CONSUMER” .
In the SUPPLY SIDE quota system, the DEALER is responsible to pay for the PRICE of the quota lot that he is interested in, with a MINIMUM PRICE fixed by the Government – at $5000 PER CAR as suggested in my post.
Compared to a DEMAND SIDE quota system – as in the PRESENT COE SYSTEM, the DEALER will NORMALLY assist the Car Buyer to bid for a COE that is PAID BY THE CUSTOMER, at a COE PRICE LEVEL that is ARBITRALIY DETERMINED with NO TRANSPARENCY.
Where is the ADDITIONAL RUNG in the LADDER with the SUPPLY SIDE quota system, when the DEALER is made responsible to PAY for the PRICE that is tendered according to his preferred Quota Lot Size ?
In the present COE system, do you think that the Dealers are NOT using their employees names, relatives, spouse’s name to buy COE too, and creating a COE resale market – as had happened ?
If this practice has been removed, the same measures can also be implemented in a SUPPLY SIDE quota system to prevent similar abuses. So what is your problem to accept a SUPPLY SIDE quota system that allow a "CHEAPER COE PRICE" than a NORMAL COE price paid PER CAR for the Car Owner ?
About your comment on my “stupid fixed quota size”, please refer to my post on Page 1 of this thread, dated 10 October 2003 – 02:54AM, it was clearly printed as follows:
“ The difference between the SUPPLY side quota control and the DEMAND side COE quota control is that a Dealership will have to commit not to the payment of ONE vehicle, but for the entire quota of a fixed quantity of vehicles - either 500, 1000, [color=red]or any numbers lower or higher [/color].”
Again, on Page 1, 10 October 2003 – 11:24 AM, the following statement was again made in my post:
" If 5000 vehicles can only benefit 5000 BUYERS only, does it really matter if this 5000 vehicles (divided into whatever smaller lots) benefit whatever numbers of dealership ?
Someone has to loose out on the opportunity to buy a car, so does it matter if some dealership sell more, or sell nothing at all ?
[color=red]If fairness is to be done, then divide into smaller quota lots of 25 or 50 vehicles per quota permit, so as to allow more dealership to have its share.[/color] "
Are you satisfied that the SUPPLY SIDE quota system DOES NOT NECESSARILY have to be in lots of 300, 500, 1000, 2000, 5000 – it depends on what and how the final solution is convenient to be acceptable to the Dealerships and to the Vehicle Buyers. -
Surely now, if you can afford to buy a BMW, why even consider a Mitsubishi in the first place ? If you can only afford to buy a Mitsubishi, I am not sure if you have enough budget even to be forced to buy a BMW.
Another argument against your stupid fixed quota size. If a brand mitsubishi sell 700 cars a month, and he deicded to buy only 500 COE because they will be "overcharged" from your great idea previously, while BMW sell 300 a month and force to buy 500 COE as there aren't any other smaller denominators suggested by u again. Suppose I wanted to buy a mitsubish. But in the end I was turned down as it has ran out of COE, I will be forced to buy BMW tat month isn't it ? Does your fixed quota make any sense then ?? If I am importing Porche, importing a or 2 car per month, how much lots should I buy then ?
If one has to be stupid, it does not take too much smart effort to do so in trying to be a Car Dealer and wondering the quota lot size to bid for when importing any make of car.
Obviously, you are not an entrepreneur who can overcome the challenges of a new idea ?
When a Dealer is successful in getting the quota lot size – in a SUPPLY SIDE quota system, he can dispose of the available cars to be sold in any manner the Dealership wish.
Read point 5 carefully again,
Why will dealer ever choose balloting when he can go for aunctioning tat will give him more profit ? They r profit orientated isn't it ? Business is meant to make money, they r not here doing charity. Only can Gov to do such things direct to car owners,as wat I have suggested previously.
Nowhere did I suggest that the Dealership must only resort to balloting, as I had indicated that it is only GOOD PUBLIC RELATIONS that the Dealership does so to overcome the greater number of buyers against the limited quota of cars available to be sold
Again, you have allowed “stupidity to get in the way of being smart” – since the Car Dealership is only interested in selling his stock of cars, and not exactly trying to squeeze every available dollar from the Car Buyer through a wild auction system. How will you react to such a Car Dealership, if you have the budget to be a Car Buyer ?
If there are “tons of rich guys around in Singapore using money to buy property, shares, and etc.” then the property market will not be so gloomy, the stock exchange index would have surged with high volume turnover, and the basic economic outlook will not be as gloomy as it is today in Singapore. So where are your rich guys ?
U really underestimate the potential of dealing with COE. Singapore definitely will have people buying cars right ? And the demand will be much greater than the quota given by Gov. The real price will definitely be higher than the "proposed" lower price u want the gov to set. The demand for COE will be the push factor for maintaining the price. Paying upright may be very difficult to u, but there r tons of rich guys around in Singapore using money to buy property, shares and etc. If your only deterent is just having a large capital, then I have to say it won't work. If the return is high, no matter how much the price is, people will invest in it. In the case u r really stupid, there r people investing hundreds of thousands to a mere business plan just to have the hope of getting back the money in a matter of many years, and the risk of losing it all is very great. I don't see why they will not buy the relatively safer COE for investment instead. If Gov quota is 5000, and each cost $1000, I think it is easy to monopolise the market using the many relatives' IC approach, needing only just $5 million dollars in capital. U again think tat is huge ? Then u really have to start work in a fiance company boy.
Are ownership of COE transferable ? Can one actually bid for a COE and resell it at a higher price ?
If you think that the COE system is transparent then you truly live up to your credo and there is nothing more that need to be explained to try to help you to turn around.
Why is the COE not open and transparent to u ? The price is really paid by how much they bid, and the expected price is shown on the net everyday. Wat part is invinsible to u ? R u going to ask from Gov for something not practical again ?
For the benefit of the others, who have been following our series of exchanges, perhaps they will agree that it will be more transparent if the names of those putting up the bids are also displayed. If you believe in the auction system, which is a LIVE EVENT, then the COE system should be as LIVE as can be possible, so as to ensure that realistic bids are put by REAL PEOPLE, and not “ghosts”.
Taxing is one thing, but “milking” the Citizens is another thing.
The idea is not about how the Gov spend tax money, it is about if Gov should use tis method to gather tax money. Do u think tis is a bad way of taxing ?
U feel tat the money is not well spent by Gov when it collect COE as tax. U think u will do a better job ? From your stupid suggestion for COE, I can see how good your problem solving ability is. Your suggestion has no value added in it, creating more problems and u refuse to face tat point. Go back, read my 7 points again and reply instead of re-telling everyone wat your idea is all about again. Please answer my first point. This is third time I ask u to reply tat question.
Frankly I can not even see a single advantage nor any feasibility compared to the old COE method. Too much loop holes and not well thought, I think u better start from formula again.
If you prefer the Government to “milk” us in every possible way, as what the Government is doing to Singaporeans – by cornering every types of services that Singaporeans need daily, and through every single transaction performed via GST, ERP, HDB and URA car parks in every and any available space for every minute of the day and night.
The COE system was originally set out to CONTROL the GROWTH of the vehicle population in Singapore, and as stated, it has become so lucrative, that the original objective seems to have been lost; and the Government is now increasing the COE quota every month.
Perhaps in living up to your credo, you have lost sight of this event, and assume that the Government is looking after you – (with the issuing of Singapore Shares, HDB Upgrading Programs and other “bribes” that you end up paying for ) , while taking more out of your pocket on a daily basis without you even feeling the pinch until it hurts.
Maybe there is some truth in your being “stupid-is-smart” so as to be able to accept these Government “milking” actions in a justifiably positive manner, and forget the original declared objective made with the COE system. Sleep soundly in the arms of the Government and let it milk you while you go into deep slumber. -
Again and again I have ask u toreply to the situation when there r more bidders than the quota set by Gov. Instead of answering tat u still keep telling me tat it won't happened. Do u know anything about warehouse management ? A company will not keep its inventory of raw material exact to the number of product they sold. They will keep a SURPLUS of it so that they can rush through sudden orders and etc. Hence if I sold 700 cars at the month before, I will not buy in 700 exact but will buy in 800. Why ? Wat if the cars r sold out at the 3rd week ? Wat if there is a boom in the car been sold tat month ? I will again have to close my shop till the end of the month again is it ? No one know how much product they can sell within a month. If tat is the case, wat is going to prevent over bidding from Gov ?
And further more, they can surely sell out all the COE they obtained easily. If they don't, they just keep it till next month and sell it off. Do u think they will have to consider so much as wat u described ? THe sum of money u describe is little. As I have said, if u have $5 million, u have monopolise the car industry for tat month. U can sell it off for $10000 each, which will give u a handsome profit of $50 million in return. Will buyer still pay for tat amount ?? Of course they will, since it is lower than the $50000 COE we pay now. And here u go again describing tat won't happen tat won't happen.
""
The present COE system is a ballot box system. The quota sent(not sure who will sent this as said by you) to the Government is already increasing with each COE tender exercise ?and is NOT MEETING the OBJECTIVE of the COE (or DEMAND SIDE) vehicle population control.
The dealer is pushing the COE price higher, as they try to grab any COE available ON BEHALF of the Car Buyer (your customer), as it is the Car Buyer who will pay for the COE when the bid is successful. So I am not sure how you get the idea that the Dealership is passing the COE cost to the customer (?) since the Car Buyer is already being forced by a COE system to pay UP FRONT for the COE price.
""
R u updated at all ? Have they use ballot boxes at all ? Do I have to involve dealers in bidding COE ? Is there any general knowledge left in your brain ? Presently if I want to bid for COE,I will do it myself through tis website.
http://www.onemotoring.com.sg/vehBuy/buy_bcoe.asp
http://www.onemotoring.com.sg/faq/faqIndex.asp?CatID=80#7
U can update yourself reading through tis website about the openness of COE system and tat bidding for COE. NOW car owners do not require any help from DEALER at all in bidding for COE. They get to bid themselves. Who actually go through a car agent to buy a COE now ??? I wanted a car, I buy the COE direct from Gov, then after obtaining the cert I go over to the car dealers and select my car. TAT IS ALL ! Why go to a dealer and ask them to bid for me ? If u r lazy and stupid, asking dealer to bid for u, don't blame gov but blame yourself as the dealer not the one paying the COE in the end, the dealer just want u to get the COE in the end.
PRESENT: Gov -> Buyer
STUPID IDEA : Gov -> Dealer -> Buyer
Isn't tat adding another rung of ladder to the red tape, the complication and the problems with your "smart" idea ? And u acknowledge tat dealer will make a profit from trading in COE, u just add COST to the buyer in COE now.
Seems u know the trend of using other peopel IC, how is your overcharging policy going to work then ?
If in the end if the lowest denomination is 20, then I just gather 20 people to buy the COE, which is very easy. Wat difference will it make to the present COE system where the owner bid their own COE ? Won't tat cause over bidding to the Gov again ?
"""
Surely now, if you can afford to buy a BMW, why even consider a Mitsubishi in the first place ? If you can only afford to buy a Mitsubishi, I am not sure if you have enough budget even to be forced to buy a BMW.
"""
Tat is a stupid remark from u again. I am trying to say I want to have a car A, but it ran out of COE tat month. So how if I need a car tis month ?? I am forced to buy B which I don't really like due to the implementation of your stupid suggestion. Is tat good to general population ?
"""
Nowhere did I suggest that the Dealership must only resort to balloting, as I had indicated that it is only GOOD PUBLIC RELATIONS that the Dealership does so to overcome the greater number of buyers against the limited quota of cars available to be sold
""
Good, at least u realise u just create another social problem to society. U r not car dealer, u won't know how they react. People r more resourceful and smarter than u think. And the dealer, probably everyone, will want to squeeze watever money they can made when opportunity arise.
If stock exchange is gloomy, tat doesn't mean there aren't rich guy around. For the rich, they have tis mentality. Why will I want to invest my money on tis investment ? Wat is the return for me if I invest tis money ? They don't go around wasting money to buy any stocks, any property they want. They r waiting for opportunity. If u just anyhow whack at the stock in singapore, u will find tat your riches will be wasted. Wake up !! If the stock market is gloomy, it doesn't mean there is no rich people around. If the streets of a country is dirty, does tat mean ALL the people there r dirty people ? If the streets r all clean, does the people of tat country deemed as clean and tidy ?
Another of your stupid remark. Why will u want to publish out the name of the bidders for all to see ? If I bid for a car, and I bid at a high amount, why will I want other peoople to see I am the one bidding for it ? To me tis is my personal privacy. When the bid is over, there will be people claiming the COE isn't it ?? Using auction ? Why downgrade to a lower system when we have a more superior system on line now ? THERE R 5000 COE to fill up ! Do u expect people to sit there for 3 days 3 nights to finish auctioning for it all ?? There may be 50000 people trying to buy COE. U want it to held at national stadium ? WILL THE PRICE BE FAIR ?? The initially price may be very different than the price of the last COE sold.
As I say, I am asking if u think tis a bad way of taxing. I am not asking how Gov is spending the tax money. However your idea of the supply system has fail miserably. So u got any smart ideas to replace it ?
Your attack seems groundless as u keep feeling your idea is good. I have asked for four times now. If there is an overbidding from Gov quota, wat is gov going to do ? They raise the bidding price, go to ballot box or wat ? -
Do you read what your eyes see ? The following was printed to address your problem in understanding what was previously written:Originally posted by stupidissmart:Again and again I have ask u toreply to the situation when there r more bidders than the quota set by Gov. Instead of answering tat u still keep telling me tat it won't happened.
My question to you: - can the COE system of a monthly fixed quantity of [color=red]5000 certificates be sufficient for a monthly demand of 10,000 buyers through 300 car dealerships – (all numbers are ASSUMPTIONS similar to your hypothetical numbers) ?[/color]
Did the words "it won't happen" appear anywhere in my text ?
Obviously, being a warehouse expert you are not exactly a financial wizard to appreciate the cost of holding surplus stocks.
Do u know anything about warehouse management ? A company will not keep its inventory of raw material exact to the number of product they sold. They will keep a [b]SURPLUS of it so that they can rush through sudden orders and etc. Hence if I sold 700 cars at the month before, I will not buy in 700 exact but will buy in 800. Why ? Wat if the cars r sold out at the 3rd week ? Wat if there is a boom in the car been sold tat month ? I will again have to close my shop till the end of the month again is it ? No one know how much product they can sell within a month. If tat is the case, wat is going to prevent over bidding from Gov ? [/b]
Firstly, do you understand the whole purpose of CONTROLLING the GROWTH of the VEHICLE POPULATION in Singapore - either with the COE (DEMAND SIDE Quota) or SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your understanding it as being "CHEAPER COE") ?
The ORIGINAL idea of COE was to CONTROL THE GROWTH of the car population - NOT TO COLLECT REVENUE for the Government; and certainly not for the benefit of the CAR DEALERSHIPs or the BUYERS
Did you read exactly what was posted previously ?
And further more, they can surely sell out all the COE they obtained easily. If they don't, they just keep it till next month and sell it off. Do u think they will have to consider so much as wat u described ?
To prevent any SINGLE Dealership in taking control of all available quota, the SUPPLY SIDE Quota System can be 'FINE TUNED' to ensure that it does not happen.
My proposal was to make it more expensive - by leaps of 20 percent - for every subsequent quota awarded to a successful bid by any single Dealership.
It will make the cost of UNSOLD cars to be kept in stock.
Sure the Car Owners can pay whatever amount that the Dealers are willing to charge if the head instincts have shown, but do not forget that whether it is a COE (DEMAND SIDE Quota) or SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your "Cheaper COE) will have a limit in the quantity of cars to be sold.
THe sum of money u describe is little. As I have said, if u have $5 million, u have monopolise the car industry for tat month. U can sell it off for $10000 each, which will give u a handsome profit of $50 million in return. Will buyer still pay for tat amount ?? Of course they will, since it is lower than the $50000 COE we pay now. And here u go again describing tat won't happen tat won't happen.
What is your concern here ? All the quota falling into the hands of one dealership, or Cheaper COE with a SUPPLY SIDE Quota system, or loss in Revenue for the Government ?
With such a system, is there transparency as to who has submitted an electronic bid ? Does your name appear at all ? Finally, with so many bidders to a limited number of the Present COE Quota, will there not be the primitive ballot box - whether using an actual box or electronic means ?
""
The present COE system is a ballot box system. The quota sent(not sure who will sent this as said by you) to the Government is already increasing with each COE tender exercise ?and is NOT MEETING the OBJECTIVE of the COE (or DEMAND SIDE) vehicle population control.
The dealer is pushing the COE price higher, as they try to grab any COE available ON BEHALF of the Car Buyer (your customer), as it is the Car Buyer who will pay for the COE when the bid is successful. So I am not sure how you get the idea that the Dealership is passing the COE cost to the customer (?) since the Car Buyer is already being forced by a COE system to pay UP FRONT for the COE price.
""
R u updated at all ? Have they use ballot boxes at all ? Do I have to involve dealers in bidding COE ? Is there any general knowledge left in your brain ? Presently if I want to bid for COE,I will do it myself through tis website.
http://www.onemotoring.com.sg/vehBuy/buy_bcoe.asp
http://www.onemotoring.com.sg/faq/faqIndex.asp?CatID=80#7
U can update yourself reading through tis website about the openness of COE system and tat bidding for COE. NOW car owners do not require any help from DEALER at all in bidding for COE. They get to bid themselves. Who actually go through a car agent to buy a COE now ??? I wanted a car, I buy the COE direct from Gov, then after obtaining the cert I go over to the car dealers and select my car. TAT IS ALL ! Why go to a dealer and ask them to bid for me ? If u r lazy and stupid, asking dealer to bid for u, don't blame gov but blame yourself as the dealer not the one paying the COE in the end, the dealer just want u to get the COE in the end.
Not quite correct in what you have indicated, and should be :-
PRESENT: Gov -> Buyer
STUPID IDEA : Gov -> Dealer -> Buyer
Isn't tat adding another rung of ladder to the red tape, the complication and the problems with your "smart" idea ? And u acknowledge tat dealer will make a profit from trading in COE, u just add COST to the buyer in COE now.
PRESENT: Gov - > Buyer / DEALER-Buyer "STUPID-is-SMART" IDEA: Gov -> Dealer
Buyer just pay for the car with the price of all the Dealer's cost indicated, including the quota price paid for with the SUPPLY SIDE Quota control. (This option can be FINE TUNED).
The idea of NORMAL COE (DEMAND SIDE Quota) or SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your preferred term of CHEAPER COE) is to control the Growth of the Car Population.
Seems u know the trend of using other peopel IC, how is your overcharging policy going to work then ?
If in the end if the lowest denomination is 20, then I just gather 20 people to buy the COE, which is very easy. Wat difference will it make to the present COE system where the owner bid their own COE ? Won't tat cause over bidding to the Gov again ?
So black cat or white car, what is the difference ? The same cat catches the mouse.
The only problem is that with one cat (the NORMAL COE) there is no transparency since no one knows if the bid price is a "ghost" bidder.
My apologies for hurting your feelings with the sarcasm.
"""
Surely now, if you can afford to buy a BMW, why even consider a Mitsubishi in the first place ? If you can only afford to buy a Mitsubishi, I am not sure if you have enough budget even to be forced to buy a BMW.
"""
Tat is a stupid remark from u again. I am trying to say I want to have a car A, but it ran out of COE tat month. So how if I need a car tis month ?? I am forced to buy B which I don't really like due to the implementation of your stupid suggestion. Is tat good to general population ?
If Car A runs out of stock (whether due to lack of COE or physical car stock), and if you really like that car, surely you can wait ?
The waiting list of some of the most prestigeous car is almost a few months long, What is the big deal of a Mitsubishi or any other make ?
The problem with most Singaporean Car Owners is their ridiculous frenzied and desperate instinct to possess a car, even just to own a NEW car for once in a Life Time, and selling it after one or two years being unable to meet the instalments, or when COE price drop again. In the process, losing at least 20 Percent per year. -
Do you read what your eyes see ? The following was printed to address your problem in understanding what was previously written:Originally posted by stupidissmart:Again and again I have ask u toreply to the situation when there r more bidders than the quota set by Gov. Instead of answering tat u still keep telling me tat it won't happened.
My question to you: - can the COE system of a monthly fixed quantity of [color=red]5000 certificates be sufficient for a monthly demand of 10,000 buyers through 300 car dealerships – (all numbers are ASSUMPTIONS similar to your hypothetical numbers) ?[/color]
Have I printed anywhere in my post that there WILL NOT BE "more Bidders will be Lesser than the quota set by Gov" ?
Obviously, being a warehouse expert you are not exactly a financial wizard to appreciate the cost of holding surplus stocks.
Do u know anything about warehouse management ? A company will not keep its inventory of raw material exact to the number of product they sold. They will keep a [b]SURPLUS of it so that they can rush through sudden orders and etc. Hence if I sold 700 cars at the month before, I will not buy in 700 exact but will buy in 800. Why ? Wat if the cars r sold out at the 3rd week ? Wat if there is a boom in the car been sold tat month ? I will again have to close my shop till the end of the month again is it ? No one know how much product they can sell within a month. If tat is the case, wat is going to prevent over bidding from Gov ? [/b]
Firstly, do you understand the whole purpose of CONTROLLING the GROWTH of the VEHICLE POPULATION in Singapore - either with the COE (DEMAND SIDE Quota) or SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your understanding it as being "CHEAPER COE" ) ?
The ORIGINAL idea of COE was to control the growth of the car population - NOT TO COLLECT REVENUE for the Government; and certainly not for the benefit of the CAR DEALERSHIPs.
Did you read exactly what was posted previously ?
And further more, they can surely sell out all the COE they obtained easily. If they don't, they just keep it till next month and sell it off. Do u think they will have to consider so much as wat u described ?
To prevent any SINGLE Dealership in taking control of all available quota, the SUPPLY SIDE Quota System can be 'FINE TUNED' to ensure that it does not happen.
My proposal was to make it more expensive - by leaps of 20 percent - for every subsequent quota to a successful bid by any single Dealership.
It will make the cost of UNSOLD cars to be kept in stock to be EXPENSIVE to the Dealership so as to prevent overbidding.
Sure the Car Owners can pay whatever amount that the Dealers are willing to charge if the head instincts have shown, but do not forget that whether it is a COE (DEMAND SIDE Quota) or SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your "Cheaper COE) will have a limit in the quantity of cars to be sold.
THe sum of money u describe is little. As I have said, if u have $5 million, u have monopolise the car industry for tat month. U can sell it off for $10000 each, which will give u a handsome profit of $50 million in return. Will buyer still pay for tat amount ?? Of course they will, since it is lower than the $50000 COE we pay now. And here u go again describing tat won't happen tat won't happen.
What is your concern here ? All the quota falling into the hands of one dealership, or Cheaper COE with a SUPPLY SIDE Quota system, or loss in Revenue for the Government ? Be specifically clear.
With such a system, is there transparency as to who has submitted an electronic bid ? Does your name appear at all ? Finally, with so many bidders to a limited number of the Present COE Quota, will there not be the primitive ballot box - whether using an actual box or electronic means ?
""
The present COE system is a ballot box system. The quota sent(not sure who will sent this as said by you) to the Government is already increasing with each COE tender exercise ?and is NOT MEETING the OBJECTIVE of the COE (or DEMAND SIDE) vehicle population control.
The dealer is pushing the COE price higher, as they try to grab any COE available ON BEHALF of the Car Buyer (your customer), as it is the Car Buyer who will pay for the COE when the bid is successful. So I am not sure how you get the idea that the Dealership is passing the COE cost to the customer (?) since the Car Buyer is already being forced by a COE system to pay UP FRONT for the COE price.
""
R u updated at all ? Have they use ballot boxes at all ? Do I have to involve dealers in bidding COE ? Is there any general knowledge left in your brain ? Presently if I want to bid for COE,I will do it myself through tis website.
http://www.onemotoring.com.sg/vehBuy/buy_bcoe.asp
http://www.onemotoring.com.sg/faq/faqIndex.asp?CatID=80#7
U can update yourself reading through tis website about the openness of COE system and tat bidding for COE. NOW car owners do not require any help from DEALER at all in bidding for COE. They get to bid themselves. Who actually go through a car agent to buy a COE now ??? I wanted a car, I buy the COE direct from Gov, then after obtaining the cert I go over to the car dealers and select my car. TAT IS ALL ! Why go to a dealer and ask them to bid for me ? If u r lazy and stupid, asking dealer to bid for u, don't blame gov but blame yourself as the dealer not the one paying the COE in the end, the dealer just want u to get the COE in the end.
Not quite correct in what you have indicated, and should be :-
PRESENT: Gov -> Buyer
STUPID IDEA : Gov -> Dealer -> Buyer
Isn't tat adding another rung of ladder to the red tape, the complication and the problems with your "smart" idea ? And u acknowledge tat dealer will make a profit from trading in COE, u just add COST to the buyer in COE now.
PRESENT: Gov - > Buyer / DEALER-Buyer "STUPID-is-SMART" IDEA: Gov -> Dealer
Buyer just pay for the car with the price of all the Dealer's cost indicated, including the quota price paid for with the SUPPLY SIDE Quota control. (This option can be FINE TUNED).
The idea of NORMAL COE (DEMAND SIDE Quota) or SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your preferred term of CHEAPER COE) is to control the Growth of the Car Population.
Seems u know the trend of using other peopel IC, how is your overcharging policy going to work then ?
If in the end if the lowest denomination is 20, then I just gather 20 people to buy the COE, which is very easy. Wat difference will it make to the present COE system where the owner bid their own COE ? Won't tat cause over bidding to the Gov again ?
So black cat or white car, what is the difference ? The same cat catches the mouse.
The only problem is that with one cat (the NORMAL COE) there is no transparency since no one knows if the bid price is a "ghost" bidder. -
My apologies for hurting your feelings with the sarcasm.
"""
Surely now, if you can afford to buy a BMW, why even consider a Mitsubishi in the first place ? If you can only afford to buy a Mitsubishi, I am not sure if you have enough budget even to be forced to buy a BMW.
"""
Tat is a stupid remark from u again. I am trying to say I want to have a car A, but it ran out of COE tat month. So how if I need a car tis month ?? I am forced to buy B which I don't really like due to the implementation of your stupid suggestion. Is tat good to general population ?
If Car A runs out of stock (whether due to lack of COE or physical car stock), and if you really like that car, surely you can wait ?
The waiting list of some of the most prestigeous car is almost a few months long, What is the big deal of a Mitsubishi or any other make ?
The problem with most Singaporean Car Owners is their ridiculous frenzied and desperate instinct to possess a car, even just to own a NEW car for once in a Life Time, and selling it after one or two years being unable to meet the instalments, or when COE price drop again. In the process, losing at least 20 Percent per year.
I am surprise that you think so highly of Car Dealers for their ability to be resourceful and smarter than anyone (perhaps even yourself); and at the same time you judge them dastardly low for trying to squeeze "watever money they can made when opportunity arise".
"""
Nowhere did I suggest that the Dealership must only resort to balloting, as I had indicated that it is only GOOD PUBLIC RELATIONS that the Dealership does so to overcome the greater number of buyers against the limited quota of cars available to be sold
""
Good, at least u realise u just create another social problem to society. U r not car dealer, u won't know how they react. People r more resourceful and smarter than u think. And the dealer, probably everyone, will want to squeeze watever money they can made when opportunity arise.
Are you sure you are reading what you want to see from my post ?
I did mention that if they so wish they can use any other method to dispose of their limited stock from a successful SUPPLY SIDE Quota Bid.
I also mentioned that for the sake of GOOD PUBLIC RELATIONS they MAY resort to BALLOTING - and this was made in reply to your question as to what the Dealership should do when their stock is less then the huge number of buyers wanting to buy their car.
So your brilliance show up again ?
If stock exchange is gloomy, tat doesn't mean there aren't rich guy around. For the rich, they have tis mentality. Why will I want to invest my money on tis investment ? Wat is the return for me if I invest tis money ? They don't go around wasting money to buy any stocks, any property they want. They r waiting for opportunity. If u just anyhow whack at the stock in singapore, u will find tat your riches will be wasted. Wake up !! If the stock market is gloomy, it doesn't mean there is no rich people around. If the streets of a country is dirty, does tat mean ALL the people there r dirty people ? If the streets r all clean, does the people of tat country deemed as clean and tidy ?
One who is rich can is smart enough to NOT "go around wasting money to buy any stocks, any property they want. They r waiting for opportunity", but stupid enough not to be able to wait for the arrival of new stock of COE or Cars, and allow oneself to be FORCED to switch to another alternative make of cars - (from Mitsubishi to BMW; or "M" to "B" ) ?
Without such a list of the names of Real Bidders for the present COE system, how do we know that the actual COE bid prices are made by the Government, or by "stupid" people who think themselves as being so "smart" ?
Another of your stupid remark. Why will u want to publish out the name of the bidders for all to see ? If I bid for a car, and I bid at a high amount, why will I want other peoople to see I am the one bidding for it ? To me tis is my personal privacy. When the bid is over, there will be people claiming the COE isn't it ?? Using auction ? Why downgrade to a lower system when we have a more superior system on line now ? THERE R 5000 COE to fill up ! Do u expect people to sit there for 3 days 3 nights to finish auctioning for it all ?? There may be 50000 people trying to buy COE. U want it to held at national stadium ? WILL THE PRICE BE FAIR ?? The initially price may be very different than the price of the last COE sold.
I am not sure in your brilliance of believing in your credo, you will actually qualify to make any sound judgment of any idea being smarter, as it will end up as being stupid with your inability to judge - since in your case "smart-is-stupid".
As I say, I am asking if u think tis a bad way of taxing. I am not asking how Gov is spending the tax money. However your idea of the supply system has fail miserably. So u got any smart ideas to replace it ?
Why do you feel for me that my idea is good, when I have mentioned at least twice over the last 24 hours that my solution may not be the FINAL SOLUTION, and require further fine tuning.
Your attack seems groundless as u keep feeling your idea is good.
The problem with a credo that "stupid-is-smart" is that it will lead one to think that one is smarter by being brilliantly stupid.
I have asked for four times now. If there is an overbidding from Gov quota, wat is gov going to do ? They raise the bidding price, go to ballot box or wat ?
Your question begs the answer from a Singapore Government that is so money faced that when there is overbidding for (not from) Government Quota, it will simply increase the quota allotment (as in the present COE system) so that more desparate Singapore Car Owners will pay more for the government controlled supply of "limited" COE.
My proposal for a SUPPLY SIDE Quota System with a fixed price - (at the lower end of a PROPOSED $5000) - per car in EACH Quota Lot, and make the DEALERS pay UPFRONT for the entire quota, is to achieve the ORIGINAL OBJECTIVE of the present COE, but WITHOUT the ridiculous speculative frenzy of COE bid prices - that are NOT TRANSPARENT to begin with.
Your term to my SUPPLY SIDE Quota System as a "CHEAPER COE" System already recognise the fact that it is CHEAPER than the original COE.
From your posting, it seems that you have a quarrel with my idea, in the manner that the buyers will get access to the cars, and the possibility of any SINGLE Dealer grabbing all the SUPPLY SIDE Quota in one or every tender exercise.
It is interesting that you have conveniently side stepped several issues that I have replied to you in my last Point-by-Point response, and have not brought up those matters.
Hopefully, I have done the same with this response. -
''
My question to you: - can the COE system of a monthly fixed quantity of 5000 certificates be sufficient for a monthly demand of 10,000 buyers through 300 car dealerships ?(all numbers are ASSUMPTIONS similar to your hypothetical numbers) ?
''
Is tat even considered as a reply to my question ?? Don't u get it ! We can't change the number of certificate to be given to public. Don't tell me if there are 1 million bidders for 500 certificate tat month, then the Gov has to release 1 million certificate ! No ! The number given to public has to be control as SIngapore is small ! The number is set by factors such as expiry of old cars and the expanding of the roads ! INSTANTLY CHANGING THE QUOTA IS NOT AN OPTION ! Isn't tat wat GOv is doing now, gradually increasing the number of vehicles released to the public per month. Wat I am asking is if there is an over demand from GOV side, then wat is your selection proces !!
''
Obviously, being a warehouse expert you are not exactly a financial wizard to appreciate the cost of holding surplus stocks.
Firstly, do you understand the whole purpose of CONTROLLING the GROWTH of the VEHICLE POPULATION in Singapore - either with the COE (DEMAND SIDE Quota) or SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your understanding it as being "CHEAPER COE" ) ?
The ORIGINAL idea of COE was to control the growth of the car population - NOT TO COLLECT REVENUE for the Government; and certainly not for the benefit of the CAR DEALERSHIPs.
""
Wat does the above point mean ? Why repeat telling me the same point again ? I ask u then, if I sell 713 cars tis month, how much will u propose to bid for next month COE ?
""
My proposal was to make it more expensive - by leaps of 20 percent - for every subsequent quota to a successful bid by any single Dealership.
""
U haven't try to even read from my mail at all is it ??? Ti sis from my earlier mail
""
I can use my spouse's, parent's IC to bid to avoid the issue of being charged more for extra bidding isn't it ? If u need a car dealership license, I will register a car dealership business with my spouse's name and again use it to buy ownership.
""
In tat case, I will not be OVERCHARGED at ALL ! If I need 1000, and gov start overcharging for number greater than 500. Wat will I do ? I will buy in 500 and ask my wife to buy in another 500. How will I be overcharged ? U cannot fine tuned tat idea anymore, it have to be overhaul !
""
What is your concern here ? All the quota falling into the hands of one dealership, or Cheaper COE with a SUPPLY SIDE Quota system, or loss in Revenue for the Government ? Be specifically clear.
""
I am concern tat COE doesn't get any cheaper for potential owners, and the original profit from COE is being taken by business man ! Then wat is the use of your idea ? U prefer a business man to earn the profit or Gov to take the profit !
""
PRESENT: Gov - > Buyer / DEALER-Buyer "STUPID-is-SMART" IDEA: Gov -> Dealer
Buyer just pay for the car with the price of all the Dealer's cost indicated, including the quota price paid for with the SUPPLY SIDE Quota control. (This option can be FINE TUNED).
""
Tis is incredible ! Who r u trying to cheat ? Do u have any idea wat u had said ? But just from your above chain, dealer has to drive all the cars themselves ! Wat is the difference from just repackaging ? If I buy coffee and sugar and sell them together, tat doesn't mean the supply chain start with me ! For just coffe, the chain start from
farmer -> company -> exporter -> distributer -> shophouses -> consumer
NOT
shop houses -> consumer
if I just sell both coffee and sugar together as a package, tat doesn't mean my roots doesn't start from farmer !!
For your stupid idea, and for your stupid sense, after dealer, the chain must continue to the buyer ! Hence
Gov -> Dealer -> buyer
U better read tis paragraph again
""
If dealer really buy in $10000 per COE from the gov tat month, we will expect them to sell at $15000 isn't it ? Can u blame them ? They r taking risks in buying COEs isn't it, thus should expect a profit as they may iccur a lose too.
""
And for the cars,they will charge for profit too. If we consider COE only, buyer has to pay additional fees if we just deal with COE only !
""
The idea of NORMAL COE (DEMAND SIDE Quota) or SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your preferred term of CHEAPER COE) is to control the Growth of the Car Population.
So black cat or white car, what is the difference ? The same cat catches the mouse. ""
Tat is better to describe your idea bah. If there r 50000 people bidding for 5000 COE, the GOV will give the cert to highest bidder again,and the price of COE will remain relatively the SAME, if not, your stupid idea will charge car owners higher ! U fail to answer wat is GOV SELECTION PROCESS if there is an over bidding ! Whether gov sell directly to people or to dealer, they still must pay the high COE ! Wat difference had u made !
They can wait, true. But tat is an added DISADVANTAGE of your idea ! I don't have to wait but due to tis idea, I must wait longer !
Yes,they can resort to bidding. But they can ALSO resort to auction. The cost has become higher AGAIN ! People can go for 50000 per car, if they go for auction, the price will still fetch 50000 per car. Tis time dealer get all tat money instead. Wat merit has your idea have then ?
I am saying they r waiting for opportunity. If COE start to sell by your idea, tat opportunity arrived and they will use it to buy COE in big stock. I am NOT SAYING THEY R WAITING FOR YOUR STUPID IDEA TO BE REALISED ! I am saying there r people with money to invest. CK tang is 357 million ++, a normal bungalow 1.5 million ++. Is 5 million TAT MUCH ??
''
Without such a list of the names of Real Bidders for the present COE system, how do we know that the actual COE bid prices are made by the Government, or by "stupid" people who think themselves as being so "smart" ?
""
If they want to cheat, they can still put in bogus name there and u still don't know if such person exists. U think putting name work at all ?? Why do u think Gov will resort to STUPID things as wat u had described ? If so, then COE will have accidents like been sold for $ 50 !
""
Why do you feel for me that my idea is good, when I have mentioned at least twice over the last 24 hours that my solution may not be the FINAL SOLUTION, and require further fine tuning.
""
The groundwork is not even set by u for your idea ? The whole idea doesn't work at all ! It just made things worse !
""
My proposal for a SUPPLY SIDE Quota System with a fixed price - (at the lower end of a PROPOSED $5000) - per car in EACH Quota Lot, and make the DEALERS pay UPFRONT for the entire quota, is to achieve the ORIGINAL OBJECTIVE of the present COE, but WITHOUT the ridiculous speculative frenzy of COE bid prices - that are NOT TRANSPARENT to begin with.
Your term to my SUPPLY SIDE Quota System as a "CHEAPER COE" System already recognise the fact that it is CHEAPER than the original COE.
""
HAHAHAHAHA !! I say it is cheaper as I cannot find any other term to differentiate between the COE now and the COE of your stupid idea. Okie, I will differentiate it now by wat I feel about your idea. I will use "stupid COE". Now u happy ??
And your objective has never been reached at all ! I ask again, if there is an over bidding, wat will be GOV selection process ?? Tell me straight !
Okie, just consider me dumb and list down in number your "several issues" tat u want me to "step into" so much. If it is something about how Gov spend its tax money, then save it for yourself. I am neutral about the Gov now
As a point, i will ask again. -
It is amazing how you twist and turn on this subject of 50,000 bidders for 5000 COE, to ONE Million bidders for 500 certificates, and despite my having given you my reply, you insist that none has been given. You truly personify your credo of " stupid-is-smart " .Originally posted by stupidissmart:''
My question to you: - can the COE system of a monthly fixed quantity of 5000 certificates be sufficient for a monthly demand of 10,000 buyers through 300 car dealerships ?(all numbers are ASSUMPTIONS similar to your hypothetical numbers) ?
''
Is tat even considered as a reply to my question ?? Don't u get it ! We can't change the number of certificate to be given to public. Don't tell me if there are 1 million bidders for 500 certificate tat month, then the Gov has to release 1 million certificate ! No ! The number given to public has to be control as SIngapore is small ! The number is set by factors such as expiry of old cars and the expanding of the roads ! INSTANTLY CHANGING THE QUOTA IS NOT AN OPTION ! Isn't tat wat GOv is doing now, gradually increasing the number of vehicles released to the public per month. Wat I am asking is if there is an over demand from GOV side, then wat is your selection proces !!
Page 1 – 09 October 2003 09:53 PM - stupidissmart
There will be obviously more demand for cars than the quota set by Gov, and they will end up giving the cars with the highest bidder again. If Gov decide to release 500 cars tis month but 50000 cars r being bidded, how is gov going to decide who get who win the bid, other than who bid a higher price again ?
Page 1 – 10 October 2003 10:45 AM - stupidissmart
I believe u have not answer the possibility of people bidding over the quota level. Who will have priority then ? If there r 10 people wanting to buy 1 car ownership from a car dealer, then who will be given priority as to who get the ownership ? I don't see why won't the dealer buy in as much ownership as possible, since the actual level of demand is tat high. I don't believe u can safely say tat it won't happened.
Page 1 – 10 October 2003 – 11:24 AM atobe
What is the objective of DEMAND side quota (COE), or SUPPLY side quota ?
If 5000 vehicles can only benefit 5000 BUYERS only, does it really matter if this 5000 vehicles (divided into whatever smaller lots) benefit whatever numbers of dealership ?
Someone has to loose out on the opportunity to buy a car, so does it matter if some dealership sell more, or sell nothing at all ?
If fairness is to be done, then divide into smaller quota lots of 25 or 50 vehicles per quota permit, so as to allow more dealership to have its share.
Page 1 – 10 October 2003 – 02:19 PM - stupidissmart
As I say, tat idea is stupid. I ask again, if 50000 bid and there is only 5000 for tis month quota, then how ? Who get to have the car ?
Page 2 – 11 October 04:34 AM – atobe
If 50,000 people were to demand from a Dealership that has dared to only successfully bid for a quota allocation of 500 cars - in a SUPPLY side scheme - do you think it will be a good PR exercise for the Dealership to get around this “difficulty” by holding a balloting exercise to determine who will be the lucky 500 new owners ?
Page 2 – 11 October 2003 – 11:35 AM - stupidissmart
If 50000 bids from dealers for 5000 gov quota, who get to have the 5000 ownership ? Those who bid more or they have go to ballot box again This is a very crucial question, please answer it.
Page 2 – 11 Octobe 2003 – 06:25 PM - atobe
Did you even bother to read my earlier post before your reply ?
Did you not read about the balloting that the Dealer can exercise ? What is to stop the Dealership from taking on more then one quota lot ?
Page 2 – 11 October 2003 – 11:38 PM - stupidissmart
All your stupid crap just keep rotating about tis big assumption tat u have. The demand will be lesser than the supply set by quota. Can u 100% say tat it will always happen ?
Page 2 – 12 October 2003 – 07:41 AM – atobe
If you can set aside trying to be smart while being stupid, and try to be objective then perhaps you will understand that all proposal will have to follow certain assumptions, until the reality of any situation prove such assumptions in a proposal to be right or wrong.
Nowhere did I write in my SUPPLY SIDE quota control system that DEMAND will be LESSER than SUPPLY.
How on earth did you read this into my post ?
Page 2 – 12 October 2003 – 02:15 PM - stupidissmart
Again and again I have ask u toreply to the situation when there r more bidders than the quota set by Gov. Instead of answering tat u still keep telling me tat it won't happened.
Page 2 – 12 October 2003 – 03:57 PM – atobe
Do you read what your eyes see ? The following was printed to address your problem in understanding what was previously written:
My question to you: - can the COE system of a monthly fixed quantity of 5000 certificates be sufficient for a monthly demand of 10,000 buyers through 300 car dealerships – (all numbers are ASSUMPTIONS similar to your hypothetical numbers) ?
Did the words "it won't happen" appear anywhere in my text ?
Now that you have read all my previous answers repeated here to the same repeated point - how do you think the present COE system will resolve the ONE Million buyers bidding for only 300 COE ?
The answer for the FINAL TIME remains the same, as what has been given repeatedly - that whether it is the PRESENT COE or the SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your CHEAPER COE), the OBJECTIVE remain the same - and that is for this month the COE or SUPPLY SIDE Quota available is only 300.
The other 999,700 Singaporeans will have to wait for the next round - and NO APPOLIGIES will be offered.
Do you have a problem with the effects of the Present COE ?
Unfortunately, the Government has missed out on the ORIGINAL OBJECTIVE of the Present COE system, by issuing more and more COE to take advantage of the high COE prices that Singaporeans are "stupid-is-NOT-so-Smart" paying, just to own a car of ten years.
Must I also help you to understand that you are fit only as a wharehouse supervisor, and not as a Financial Planner. Must I also make some marketing strategies and planning so as to help you live up to your credo too ?
''
Obviously, being a warehouse expert you are not exactly a financial wizard to appreciate the cost of holding surplus stocks.
Firstly, do you understand the whole purpose of CONTROLLING the GROWTH of the VEHICLE POPULATION in Singapore - either with the COE (DEMAND SIDE Quota) or SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your understanding it as being "CHEAPER COE" ) ?
The ORIGINAL idea of COE was to control the growth of the car population - NOT TO COLLECT REVENUE for the Government; and certainly not for the benefit of the CAR DEALERSHIPs.
""
Wat does the above point mean ? Why repeat telling me the same point again ? I ask u then, if I sell 713 cars tis month, how much will u propose to bid for next month COE ?
Do you think it is wise to change buiseness strategy to cope with an implementation of a SUPPLY SIDE Quota Control ?
Do you think it will be wise to take advance booking from all interested Vehicle Buyers, and then plan your requirements for which Quota Lot size to bid for in a SUPPLY SIDE Quota System ?
Do you make future plans based on gut feeling only, or based on real data collected ? -
""
Are you so sure that you can beat a system when the Government is determined to do something worthwhile ?
My proposal was to make it more expensive - by leaps of 20 percent - for every subsequent quota to a successful bid by any single Dealership.
""
U haven't try to even read from my mail at all is it ??? Ti sis from my earlier mail
""
I can use my spouse's, parent's IC to bid to avoid the issue of being charged more for extra bidding isn't it ? If u need a car dealership license, I will register a car dealership business with my spouse's name and again use it to buy ownership.
""
In tat case, I will not be OVERCHARGED at ALL ! If I need 1000, and gov start overcharging for number greater than 500. Wat will I do ? I will buy in 500 and ask my wife to buy in another 500. How will I be overcharged ? U cannot fine tuned tat idea anymore, it have to be overhaul !
So what if you can have a hundred relatives to register new companies, and spread the profit around to a hundred new companies, all bidding their individual quotas ?
If one company can do it, so can all the other dealership.
If each of the 100 dealership allow 100 relatives to register new companies, there will be 10,000 bidders for the same fixed 300 cars (or 300 Quota Lots - each lot of 300 cars) allowed to be imported or sold for a given month.
Whether it is in the Present COE or in my SUPPLY SIDE Quota system, there can be ONE Million bidders, but the COE or Quota allowed will remain the same.
So what is your problem with this ?""
I am surprised that you can put up your kind of assumption based on some simple misgivings, and kick up such a big fuss for what ?
What is your concern here ? All the quota falling into the hands of one dealership, or Cheaper COE with a SUPPLY SIDE Quota system, or loss in Revenue for the Government ? Be specifically clear.
""
I am concern tat COE doesn't get any cheaper for potential owners, and the original profit from COE is being taken by business man ! Then wat is the use of your idea ? U prefer a business man to earn the profit or Gov to take the profit !
You are concerned that COE get cheaper for potential vehicle owners ? Why should you be concerned ? You should be happy that Singaporeans can own a car by paying CHEAPER COE !
" ... original Profit from COE is being taken by business man" - where is the profit element coming from ? The Dealership is already required to declare the OMV, ARF or PARF of the vehicle being sold to the Vehicle Owner. Do you think it is so difficult to get the Dealership to declare also the Quota Price for the type of vehicle being offered for the current month ?""
You are certainly trying so hard to be smart while showing the stupendous brilliance of your effort.
PRESENT: Gov - > Buyer / DEALER-Buyer
"STUPID-is-SMART" IDEA: Gov -> Dealer
Buyer just pay for the car with the price of all the Dealer's cost indicated, including the quota price paid for with the SUPPLY SIDE Quota control. (This option can be FINE TUNED).
""
Tis is incredible ! Who r u trying to cheat ? Do u have any idea wat u had said ? But just from your above chain, dealer has to drive all the cars themselves ! Wat is the difference from just repackaging ? If I buy coffee and sugar and sell them together, tat doesn't mean the supply chain start with me ! For just coffe, the chain start from
farmer -> company -> exporter -> distributer -> shophouses -> consumer
NOT
shop houses -> consumer
if I just sell both coffee and sugar together as a package, tat doesn't mean my roots doesn't start from farmer !!
For your stupid idea, and for your stupid sense, after dealer, the chain must continue to the buyer ! Hence
Gov -> Dealer -> buyer
U better read tis paragraph again
Who do you think is driving the NEW IMPORTED VEHICLES from PSA to the Dealer Showrooms ? The Dealer or the Vehicle Owner ?
You are certainly quite agile in moving from one point of presenting your preferred manner of debate to another convenient way of trying to prove NOTHING.
Why did you not originally post your brilliant idea as follows ? -
Present:
raw materials->pressing plant->vehicle assembly factory->marketing->government->distributor->dealer->government->buyer
Why did you only present it as :-
PRESENT: Gov - > Buyer ( / DEALER-Buyer )
STUPID IDEA: Gov -> Dealer
In your original example given, you started with the Government issuing COE directly to the Buyer, which I also included the Dealer bidding on behalf of the Buyer.
Instead of my idea being indicated according to you as "STUPID IDEA" , I had modified it by showing the supposed "Stupid Idea" is actually "SMART" :
" STUPID-IS-SMART " IDEA : Government -> Dealer.
In this change, the DEALER get to be responsible for what the price of the Quota (or COE) being bid and paid to the Government.
There is no difference between both your examples in the NUMBER of Stages of Transaction, only the person responsible for the Price.""
It looks like that it is impossible to change your infatuation with the idea of paying for a HIGHER PRICE COE than to pay for a CHEAPER COE system in a SUPPLY SIDE Quota system.
If dealer really buy in $10000 per COE from the gov tat month, we will expect them to sell at $15000 isn't it ? Can u blame them ? They r taking risks in buying COEs isn't it, thus should expect a profit as they may iccur a lose too.
""
And for the cars,they will charge for profit too. If we consider COE only, buyer has to pay additional fees if we just deal with COE only !
""
The idea of NORMAL COE (DEMAND SIDE Quota) or SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your preferred term of CHEAPER COE) is to control the Growth of the Car Population.
[b]So black cat or white car, what is the difference ? The same cat catches the mouse. ""
Tat is better to describe your idea bah. If there r 50000 people bidding for 5000 COE, the GOV will give the cert to highest bidder again,and the price of COE will remain relatively the SAME, if not, your stupid idea will charge car owners higher ! U fail to answer wat is GOV SELECTION PROCESS if there is an over bidding ! Whether gov sell directly to people or to dealer, they still must pay the high COE ! Wat difference had u made ! [/b]
Despite the fact that you prefer to call my SUPPLY SIDE Quota System as being a "CHEAPER COE" - you still prefer to pay a HIGHER COE. It only show your brilliance in living up to your credo of being stupid-is-smart.
There is nothing more that can be done to assist mental patients, who prefer to hurt themselves, except to incarcerate them in a safe room so that they do not hurt themselves or others.
You can lead a camel to the water, but you cannot force it to drink. -
continuation:
Unfortunately, the $50 accident actually occurred - if you recall, which shows that there are Singaporeans who are NOT "stupidly smart" and will be more realistic to put in a COE bid price of $1 too.
They can wait, true. But tat is an added DISADVANTAGE of your idea ! I don't have to wait but due to tis idea, I must wait longer ! [/quote]
With or without this SUPPLY SIDE Quota System, and even with the present COE system, there are limited supply in both quota system.
If you are lucky, you will be amongst those who get the COE in the present COE system; but if you are UNLUCKY not to succeed in getting a COE, do you think that you do not have to wait to buy the car that you have the budget for ? Whatever it is, even without either quota systems, when the Dealership have no stock available, you still have to wait.
This point itself is useless to be debated upon, except to detract from the issue of the ORIGINAL OBJECTIVE of the COE being side-stepped by the Government, who are using it as a Source for Revenue Collecting.
Why will the Dealership risks its reputation by "milking" the Singaporean Buyers, when the Government enforced the rule of declaring the Quota Price paid, just as the OMV, ARF and PARF are also shown to potential Buyers ?
Yes,they can resort to bidding. But they can ALSO resort to auction. The cost has become higher AGAIN ! People can go for 50000 per car, if they go for auction, the price will still fetch 50000 per car. Tis time dealer get all tat money instead. Wat merit has your idea have then ?
The merit of the SUPPLY SIDE Quota System remains as declared that the PRICE to own a vehicle in Singapore will be dramatically reduced, and with the Growth of the Vehicle Population being correctly regulated without the financial speculative element.
I am saying they r waiting for opportunity. If COE start to sell by your idea, tat opportunity arrived and they will use it to buy COE in big stock. I am NOT SAYING THEY R WAITING FOR YOUR STUPID IDEA TO BE REALISED ! I am saying there r people with money to invest. CK tang is 357 million ++, a normal bungalow 1.5 million ++. Is 5 million TAT MUCH ??" A fool will soon part with all his money "
Unfortunately, " stupidissmart " , sad to say, those with money will very unlikely agree with you.
Dream on in the brilliance of your credo, and until you have those financial figures you probably will have the luxury to dream a bit more.
''
Without such a list of the names of Real Bidders for the present COE system, how do we know that the actual COE bid prices are made by the Government, or by "stupid" people who think themselves as being so "smart" ?
""
If they want to cheat, they can still put in bogus name there and u still don't know if such person exists. U think putting name work at all ?? Why do u think Gov will resort to STUPID things as wat u had described ? If so, then COE will have accidents like been sold for $ 50 !
Unfortunately, the Government fixed the loophole in the COE to prevent future accident of $50 successful bid. Where is the TRANSPARENCY that allow real bids of $1 ?
[quote]
""
Why do you feel for me that my idea is good, when I have mentioned at least twice over the last 24 hours that my solution may not be the FINAL SOLUTION, and require further fine tuning.
""
The groundwork is not even set by u for your idea ? The whole idea doesn't work at all ! It just made things worse ! Unfortunately, your brilliance is not quite accepted by those who have the experience of debating with you in the past, so I will not defer to your position.
By your credo of " stupid-is-smart " I accept your back handed compliment of my "stupid idea" - (of SUPPLY SIDE Quota System) - is a "Smart COE " from a SUPPLIER Side Quota idea.
""
My proposal for a SUPPLY SIDE Quota System with a fixed price - (at the lower end of a PROPOSED $5000) - per car in EACH Quota Lot, and make the DEALERS pay UPFRONT for the entire quota, is to achieve the ORIGINAL OBJECTIVE of the present COE, but WITHOUT the ridiculous speculative frenzy of COE bid prices - that are NOT TRANSPARENT to begin with.
Your term to my SUPPLY SIDE Quota System as a "CHEAPER COE" System already recognise the fact that it is CHEAPER than the original COE.
""
HAHAHAHAHA !! I say it is cheaper as I cannot find any other term to differentiate between the COE now and the COE of your stupid idea. Okie, I will differentiate it now by wat I feel about your idea. I will use "stupid COE". Now u happy ??
See the replies that have been summarized in the first part of this reply.
And your objective has never been reached at all ! I ask again, if there is an over bidding, wat will be GOV selection process ?? Tell me straight !
To consider you dumb will be an insult to those who are unable to speak - due to some birth defect.
Okie, just consider me dumb and list down in number your "several issues" tat u want me to "step into" so much. If it is something about how Gov spend its tax money, then save it for yourself. I am neutral about the Gov now
As a point, i will ask again.
At least those who are dumb, or have speech difficulties, are more intelligent to be able to differentiate the pitfalls of believing that being stupid is smart.
Giving you the benefit of the doubt that you are in no way a "spastic", it is amazing how you insist on living up to your credo of " stupid-is-smart " - especially in the manner of debating this issue. -
Bravo! Bravo! I couldn't have put it across more aptly!
-
"""
Page 1 – 09 October 2003 09:53 PM - stupidissmart
There will be obviously more demand for cars than the quota set by Gov, and they will end up giving the cars with the highest bidder again. If Gov decide to release 500 cars tis month but 50000 cars r being bidded, how is gov going to decide who get who win the bid, other than who bid a higher price again ?
Page 1 – 10 October 2003 10:45 AM - stupidissmart
I believe u have not answer the possibility of people bidding over the quota level. Who will have priority then ? If there r 10 people wanting to buy 1 car ownership from a car dealer, then who will be given priority as to who get the ownership ? I don't see why won't the dealer buy in as much ownership as possible, since the actual level of demand is tat high. I don't believe u can safely say tat it won't happened.
Page 1 – 10 October 2003 – 11:24 AM atobe
What is the objective of DEMAND side quota (COE), or SUPPLY side quota ?
If 5000 vehicles can only benefit 5000 BUYERS only, does it really matter if this 5000 vehicles (divided into whatever smaller lots) benefit whatever numbers of dealership ?
Someone has to loose out on the opportunity to buy a car, so does it matter if some dealership sell more, or sell nothing at all ?
If fairness is to be done, then divide into smaller quota lots of 25 or 50 vehicles per quota permit, so as to allow more dealership to have its share.
Page 1 – 10 October 2003 – 02:19 PM - stupidissmart
As I say, tat idea is stupid. I ask again, if 50000 bid and there is only 5000 for tis month quota, then how ? Who get to have the car ?
Page 2 – 11 October 04:34 AM – atobe
If 50,000 people were to demand from a Dealership that has dared to only successfully bid for a quota allocation of 500 cars - in a SUPPLY side scheme - do you think it will be a good PR exercise for the Dealership to get around this “difficulty” by holding a balloting exercise to determine who will be the lucky 500 new owners ?
Page 2 – 11 October 2003 – 11:35 AM - stupidissmart
If 50000 bids from dealers for 5000 gov quota, who get to have the 5000 ownership ? Those who bid more or they have go to ballot box again This is a very crucial question, please answer it.
Page 2 – 11 Octobe 2003 – 06:25 PM - atobe
Did you even bother to read my earlier post before your reply ?
Did you not read about the balloting that the Dealer can exercise ? What is to stop the Dealership from taking on more then one quota lot ?
Page 2 – 11 October 2003 – 11:38 PM - stupidissmart
All your stupid crap just keep rotating about tis big assumption tat u have. The demand will be lesser than the supply set by quota. Can u 100% say tat it will always happen ?
Page 2 – 12 October 2003 – 07:41 AM – atobe
If you can set aside trying to be smart while being stupid, and try to be objective then perhaps you will understand that all proposal will have to follow certain assumptions, until the reality of any situation prove such assumptions in a proposal to be right or wrong.
Nowhere did I write in my SUPPLY SIDE quota control system that DEMAND will be LESSER than SUPPLY.
How on earth did you read this into my post ?
Page 2 – 12 October 2003 – 02:15 PM - stupidissmart
Again and again I have ask u toreply to the situation when there r more bidders than the quota set by Gov. Instead of answering tat u still keep telling me tat it won't happened.
Page 2 – 12 October 2003 – 03:57 PM – atobe
Do you read what your eyes see ? The following was printed to address your problem in understanding what was previously written:
My question to you: - can the COE system of a monthly fixed quantity of 5000 certificates be sufficient for a monthly demand of 10,000 buyers through 300 car dealerships – (all numbers are ASSUMPTIONS similar to your hypothetical numbers) ?
Did the words "it won't happen" appear anywhere in my text ?
Now that you have read all my previous answers repeated here to the same repeated point - how do you think the present COE system will resolve the ONE Million buyers bidding for only 300 COE ?
The answer for the FINAL TIME remains the same, as what has been given repeatedly - that whether it is the PRESENT COE or the SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your CHEAPER COE), the OBJECTIVE remain the same - and that is for this month the COE or SUPPLY SIDE Quota available is only 300.
The other 999,700 Singaporeans will have to wait for the next round - and NO APPOLIGIES will be offered.
"""
R U BLIND !! U FAIL TO READ PROPER ENGLISH ?? HAVE IT EVER OCCUR TO U TAT U FAIL GET THE WAT I AM ASKING IN FIRST PLACE ?? OR U JUST TRY TO PLAY A,S,S AND CHOOSE TO ANSWER OTHER QUESTION AS AN ANSWER TO TAT ??
Gov -> release 5000
Dealer -> bidding for 50000
Question ? How does GOV choose which 5000 win the BID !!!
All tis while u never even get may question AT ALL !! I am asking u how r u going to select the 300 people out of the 1 millions people tat subimitted their bid to the gov !! Yes ,U do not have to apologise to the 999700 people, but on wat basis do u decide who get the COE and who doesn't !! HOW R GOV GOING TO SELECT THE PEOPLE IN TIS CASE ! AND I AM ASKING FROM THE GOV SIDE !! NOT DEALERSHIP VIEW ! U better read from my earlier posts again.
""
9th Oct 0953
If Gov decide to release 500 cars tis month but 50000 cars r being bidded, how is gov going to decide who get who win the bid, other than who bid a higher price again ?
10th Oct 1046
2 questions r posted here
I believe u have not answer the possibility of people bidding over the quota level. Who will have priority then ?
If there r 10 people wanting to buy 1 car ownership from a car dealer, then who will be given priority as to who get the ownership ?
10th Oct 0219
if 50000 bid and there is only 5000 for tis month quota, then how ? Who get to have the car ?
11th Oct 1135
If 50000 bids from dealers for 5000 gov quota, who get to have the 5000 ownership ? Those who bid more or they have go to ballot box again
12 Oct 0215
Again and again I have ask u to reply to the situation when there r more bidders than the quota set by Gov.
12th Oct 0812
Wat I am asking is if there is an over demand from GOV side, then wat is your selection proces !!
Do u understand wat I am asking at ALL ! If 50000 dealers bidding for 5000 COE offered by GOV, GOV !!! I MEAN GOV !! , WHO GET TO BE THE LUCKY 5000 !! HOW is GOV GOING TO SELECT TIS 5000 from 50000 people ! BY BALLOT BOX SUGGESTED BY ME OR BY WHO HAD BIDDED FOR HIGHER PRICE OR BY FIRST COME FIRST SERVE BASIS !
KEYWORD : GOV, OVERBID, SELECTION NOT DEALER SELECTION -
""
Must I also help you to understand that you are fit only as a wharehouse supervisor, and not as a Financial Planner. Must I also make some marketing strategies and planning so as to help you live up to your credo too ?
""
Tis is not just warehouse knowledge, it is COMMON SENSE ! I give u the figures, u just have to GIVE me your answer in FIGURES
U r aiming to bid for month of OCT by today, the figure below shows the number of cars u had sold in tat period of time. Up till NOW, 323 had expressed interest in buying your car.
July 823
Aug 622
Sep 713
Last year Oct 912
HOW MUCH R U GOING TO BID SINCE U R SUCH A SMART FIANCIAL PLANNER ?? Advance booking is one thing, but not EVERYONE buy car as such !! There r people tat buy tat model of car at the whim of the moment ! So u telling car dealer NOT to stock cars ownership at all ?? YOUR PLAN ONLY CAUSE MORE PROBLEMS AGAIN BY FORCING DRASTIC CHANGES !
""
Are you so sure that you can beat a system when the Government is determined to do something worthwhile ?
So what if you can have a hundred relatives to register new companies, and spread the profit around to a hundred new companies, all bidding their individual quotas ?
If one company can do it, so can all the other dealership.
If each of the 100 dealership allow 100 relatives to register new companies, there will be 10,000 bidders for the same fixed 300 cars (or 300 Quota Lots - each lot of 300 cars) allowed to be imported or sold for a given month.
""
IN SHORT YOUR STUPID IDEA of CHARGiNG OVERBIDDERS DOES NOT WORK ! NO ONE CAN STOP LOOPHOLES from a stupid idea !! Why don't u suggest some couple of more stupid ideas to stop people from doing tat ?? AND tat will still cause more changes, more stupid problem to everyone !
""
I am concern tat COE doesn't get any cheaper for potential owners, and the original profit from COE is being taken by business man !
""
I AM SAYING THE PRICE HAS INCREASE DUE TO YOUR POOR STUPID FORESIGHT. THe price of your STUPID COE will still be HIGH, the business man still get their PROFIT, in the end CONSUMER IS HURT ! If he used to buy $50000, he will have to pay $60000 stupid COE instead ! He can declared he bought for $48000, but he is charging u for $50000. Wat r u going to do ?
The DEALER is NOT the one deciding on the PRICE ! Is the MARKET ! Tat is why u got to answer how does Gov select 5000 out of the 50000 ! IF GOV go by highest bidders, than your idea neevr change the PRICE at all !! It will still be stubbornly fixed at 50000 as tat is how much consumer r willing to pay for a car ! U JUST ADDED another LINK to the consumer has THEY HAVE to pay for DEALER's RISK and EFFORT ! THE CHAIN IS STILL
GOV -> Dealer -> Buyer !
I am talking about OWNERSHIP! NOT CAR ! Wat is the origin of COE !! Your stupid chain below is for the CAR !
""
raw materials->pressing plant->vehicle assembly factory->marketing->government->distributor->dealer->government->buyer
""
""
Why will the Dealership risks its reputation by "milking" the Singaporean Buyers, when the Government enforced the rule of declaring the Quota Price paid, just as the OMV, ARF and PARF are also shown to potential Buyers ?
""
They can enforce the rules, however COE doesn't GET CHEAPER in tis case, and DEALER STILL EARN PROFIT. I have 5000 customers wanting to buy 500 cars for me. Wat does tat means ? It means I can only sell 500 tat month due to your stupid COE. So wat am I going to do, I am going to raise my price for tis month and tell people if they don't like it, wait till next month, of course putting it in a nice way. Wat is the result ? I am still earning more money from the consumer ! Who get to be hurt ? CONSUMER.
Okie, then now I have 4500 waiting list to buy the car if above is true, then I am going to bid for 5500 cars tis month. If I cannot get 4500, I have to pay them back a compensation. How am I going to achive tat high amount of cars ? I will RAISE my bidding price or watever means to get the STUPID COE. In the END consumer has to pay me for everything plus my PROFIT AGAIN, so wat is the HARM of telling me wat quota price I had set ?!
Wat solution has your stupid COE done ? INCREASE THE COST OF CUSTOMERS !
I think I better correct your idiom
"A fool and his gold will soon be parted"
Unfortunately, " Atobe" , sad to say, those with money will very unlikely to agree with you.
Keep believing tat no one is rich in Singapore. Tis is probably because none of the people u knew r rich.
""
Unfortunately, the $50 accident actually occurred - if you recall, which shows that there are Singaporeans who are NOT "stupidly smart" and will be more realistic to put in a COE bid price of $1 too.
""
I guess u must be pretty dumb. THERE R PEOPLE tat bid for $1 tat month. There r people tat bid $20, $10 too. BUT THEY FAILED TO WIN THE BID. Why will newspaper report people who put in $1 but lose the bid ? The lowest price tat won the bid tat time is $50. Anything below 50 LOSES. U CAN STILL PUT IN $1, but U lose, Every month there will be jokers placing low bid just for the fun of it.
Well, I guess it pleased u a lot when I called it stupid COE. Glad u have the IQ to realise I am actually "praising" u. Then I shall carry on calling it stupid COE.
I don't know about other people but do u really think u r winning tis argument ? U may consider me spastic, but I do believe tat your suugestions and argument suggest u r brain dead, if u ever start with a brain at all. -
This is unbelievable, as it gives me pain to do what I have done to reduce you into a corner to show the hollowness of the position you have adopted.
Hopefully you are not a masochist, as I have no wish to be a sadist.
Why do you have such a problem to my answers given ?Originally posted by stupidissmart:"""
Page 1 – 09 October 2003 09:53 PM - stupidissmart
There will be obviously more demand for cars than the quota set by Gov, and they will end up giving the cars with the highest bidder again. If Gov decide to release 500 cars tis month but 50000 cars r being bidded, how is gov going to decide who get who win the bid, other than who bid a higher price again ?
Page 1 – 10 October 2003 10:45 AM - stupidissmart
I believe u have not answer the possibility of people bidding over the quota level. Who will have priority then ? If there r 10 people wanting to buy 1 car ownership from a car dealer, then who will be given priority as to who get the ownership ? I don't see why won't the dealer buy in as much ownership as possible, since the actual level of demand is tat high. I don't believe u can safely say tat it won't happened.
Page 1 – 10 October 2003 – 11:24 AM atobe
What is the objective of DEMAND side quota (COE), or SUPPLY side quota ?
If 5000 vehicles can only benefit 5000 BUYERS only, does it really matter if this 5000 vehicles (divided into whatever smaller lots) benefit whatever numbers of dealership ?
Someone has to loose out on the opportunity to buy a car, so does it matter if some dealership sell more, or sell nothing at all ?
If fairness is to be done, then divide into smaller quota lots of 25 or 50 vehicles per quota permit, so as to allow more dealership to have its share.
Page 1 – 10 October 2003 – 02:19 PM - stupidissmart
As I say, tat idea is stupid. I ask again, if 50000 bid and there is only 5000 for tis month quota, then how ? Who get to have the car ?
Page 2 – 11 October 04:34 AM – atobe
If 50,000 people were to demand from a Dealership that has dared to only successfully bid for a quota allocation of 500 cars - in a SUPPLY side scheme - do you think it will be a good PR exercise for the Dealership to get around this “difficulty” by holding a balloting exercise to determine who will be the lucky 500 new owners ?
Page 2 – 11 October 2003 – 11:35 AM - stupidissmart
If 50000 bids from dealers for 5000 gov quota, who get to have the 5000 ownership ? Those who bid more or they have go to ballot box again This is a very crucial question, please answer it.
Page 2 – 11 Octobe 2003 – 06:25 PM - atobe
Did you even bother to read my earlier post before your reply ?
Did you not read about the balloting that the Dealer can exercise ? What is to stop the Dealership from taking on more then one quota lot ?
Page 2 – 11 October 2003 – 11:38 PM - stupidissmart
All your stupid crap just keep rotating about tis big assumption tat u have. The demand will be lesser than the supply set by quota. Can u 100% say tat it will always happen ?
Page 2 – 12 October 2003 – 07:41 AM – atobe
If you can set aside trying to be smart while being stupid, and try to be objective then perhaps you will understand that all proposal will have to follow certain assumptions, until the reality of any situation prove such assumptions in a proposal to be right or wrong.
Nowhere did I write in my SUPPLY SIDE quota control system that DEMAND will be LESSER than SUPPLY.
How on earth did you read this into my post ?
Page 2 – 12 October 2003 – 02:15 PM - stupidissmart
Again and again I have ask u toreply to the situation when there r more bidders than the quota set by Gov. Instead of answering tat u still keep telling me tat it won't happened.
Page 2 – 12 October 2003 – 03:57 PM – atobe
Do you read what your eyes see ? The following was printed to address your problem in understanding what was previously written:
My question to you: - can the COE system of a monthly fixed quantity of 5000 certificates be sufficient for a monthly demand of 10,000 buyers through 300 car dealerships – (all numbers are ASSUMPTIONS similar to your hypothetical numbers) ?
Did the words "it won't happen" appear anywhere in my text ?
Now that you have read all my previous answers repeated here to the same repeated point - how do you think the present COE system will resolve the ONE Million buyers bidding for only 300 COE ?
The answer for the FINAL TIME remains the same, as what has been given repeatedly - that whether it is the PRESENT COE or the SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your CHEAPER COE), the OBJECTIVE remain the same - and that is for this month the COE or SUPPLY SIDE Quota available is only 300.
The other 999,700 Singaporeans will have to wait for the next round - and NO APPOLIGIES will be offered.
"""
R U BLIND !! U FAIL TO READ PROPER ENGLISH ?? HAVE IT EVER OCCUR TO U TAT U FAIL GET THE WAT I AM ASKING IN FIRST PLACE ?? OR U JUST TRY TO PLAY A,S,S AND CHOOSE TO ANSWER OTHER QUESTION AS AN ANSWER TO TAT ??
Gov -> release 5000
Dealer -> bidding for 50000
Question ? How does GOV choose which 5000 win the BID !!!
All tis while u never even get may question AT ALL !! I am asking u how r u going to select the 300 people out of the 1 millions people tat subimitted their bid to the gov !! Yes ,U do not have to apologise to the 999700 people, but on wat basis do u decide who get the COE and who doesn't !! HOW R GOV GOING TO SELECT THE PEOPLE IN TIS CASE ! AND I AM ASKING FROM THE GOV SIDE !! NOT DEALERSHIP VIEW ! U better read from my earlier posts again.
If there are only 5000 car allowed to be sold by the Government, in the present COE system - they are picking those bids with the highest average around a median price. All those those bids that fall out of that "highest average median price" will not be considered.
In a SUPPLY SIDE Quota System, the same can also be applied - EXCEPT THAT THE MINIMUM PRICE is fixed at a much LOWER PRICE of FOUR DIGIT values, and in a more TRANSPARENT process.
If a dealership is lucky enough to get 1 million buyers to buy his 300 cars in stock, the best way to get more publicity is to conduct a ballot.
What is your problem with this ? It is like a Lucky Draw ! Everyone likes surprise win !""
What is the difference whether if it is the Government who decide which Dealer is lucky to get the 5000 cars to sell,
[b]9th Oct 0953
If Gov decide to release 500 cars tis month but 50000 cars r being bidded, how is gov going to decide who get who win the bid, other than who bid a higher price again ?
10th Oct 1046
2 questions r posted here
I believe u have not answer the possibility of people bidding over the quota level. Who will have priority then ?
If there r 10 people wanting to buy 1 car ownership from a car dealer, then who will be given priority as to who get the ownership ?
10th Oct 0219
if 50000 bid and there is only 5000 for tis month quota, then how ? Who get to have the car ?
11th Oct 1135
If 50000 bids from dealers for 5000 gov quota, who get to have the 5000 ownership ? Those who bid more or they have go to ballot box again
12 Oct 0215
Again and again I have ask u to reply to the situation when there r more bidders than the quota set by Gov.
12th Oct 0812
Wat I am asking is if there is an over demand from GOV side, then wat is your selection proces !!
Do u understand wat I am asking at ALL ! If 50000 dealers bidding for 5000 COE offered by GOV, GOV !!! I MEAN GOV !! , WHO GET TO BE THE LUCKY 5000 !! HOW is GOV GOING TO SELECT TIS 5000 from 50000 people ! BY BALLOT BOX SUGGESTED BY ME OR BY WHO HAD BIDDED FOR HIGHER PRICE OR BY FIRST COME FIRST SERVE BASIS !
KEYWORD : GOV, OVERBID, SELECTION NOT DEALER SELECTION
[/b]
OR
whether it is a Dealer deciding which BUYER is lucky to get the 5000 cars to buy ?
The answer is already given above.
Whew, I wonder how old you are ?
I hope I am not dealing with a Primary School kid, some of whom have far higher level of thinking process than what I am encountering here. -
For some sensible lessons of stocking vs financial cost, you need to abandon the idea of " stupid-is-smart " , because if you insist in your position there is nothing can be further said without endless cycle of assumptions that are made based on a whimsical speculation. (If you are able to discern the highlighted words in this paragraph, then we can move on) .
""
Must I also help you to understand that you are fit only as a wharehouse supervisor, and not as a Financial Planner. Must I also make some marketing strategies and planning so as to help you live up to your credo too ?
""
Tis is not just warehouse knowledge, it is COMMON SENSE ! I give u the figures, u just have to GIVE me your answer in FIGURES
I suppose you must have been very emotional on reading my last post, and could not focus on some points that were made.
U r aiming to bid for month of OCT by today, the figure below shows the number of cars u had sold in tat period of time. Up till NOW, 323 had expressed interest in buying your car.
July 823
Aug 622
Sep 713
Last year Oct 912
HOW MUCH R U GOING TO BID SINCE U R SUCH A SMART FIANCIAL PLANNER ?? Advance booking is one thing, but not EVERYONE buy car as such !! There r people tat buy tat model of car at the whim of the moment ! So u telling car dealer NOT to stock cars ownership at all ?? YOUR PLAN ONLY CAUSE MORE PROBLEMS AGAIN BY FORCING DRASTIC CHANGES !
Did you not read that we can take bookings from serious buyers, and perhaps - as a sensible car salesman - you will take a commitment fee from the buyer ?
Based on the present soft economic situation, do you think it is wise to use the Sales Figures of 912 from October 2002 ?
As a responsible Financial Person, would you commit anything huge into stock, over and above the 323 buyers who have committed with Booking Fee ?
Unfortunately, if you believe that being " stupid is smart " then your opinions and remarks will carry little weight or damage to anyone.
""
Are you so sure that you can beat a system when the Government is determined to do something worthwhile ?
So what if you can have a hundred relatives to register new companies, and spread the profit around to a hundred new companies, all bidding their individual quotas ?
If one company can do it, so can all the other dealership.
If each of the 100 dealership allow 100 relatives to register new companies, there will be 10,000 bidders for the same fixed 300 cars (or 300 Quota Lots - each lot of 300 cars) allowed to be imported or sold for a given month.
""
IN SHORT YOUR STUPID IDEA of CHARGiNG OVERBIDDERS DOES NOT WORK ! NO ONE CAN STOP LOOPHOLES from a stupid idea !! Why don't u suggest some couple of more stupid ideas to stop people from doing tat ?? AND tat will still cause more changes, more stupid problem to everyone !
Just water off a duck's back.
How can the price of my "stupid (smart) COE" by high, when you already have called my SUPPLY SIDE Quota as being a "CHEAPER COE" ?
""
I am concern tat COE doesn't get any cheaper for potential owners, and the original profit from COE is being taken by business man !
""
I AM SAYING THE PRICE HAS INCREASE DUE TO YOUR POOR STUPID FORESIGHT. THe price of your STUPID COE will still be HIGH, the business man still get their PROFIT, in the end CONSUMER IS HURT ! If he used to buy $50000, he will have to pay $60000 stupid COE instead ! He can declared he bought for $48000, but he is charging u for $50000. Wat r u going to do ?
When this SUPPLY SIDE Quota Control was first introduced in my post, I had specifically indicated that the Government should fixed the price of each car in the Quota at a 4 figure value - I had proposed $5000 as an illustration. The Dealerships will then bid PLUS or MINUS this stated sum of $5000 for each Quota Lots - (of either 10, 20, 30, 50, 100, 200, 300, 500, 1000, 2000 vehicles or whatever mathematical matrix to suit the market) .
As a Condition in the SUPPLY SIDE Quota, the Dealership will be required to pay UPFRONT for the price of their bid, NOT the Buyers.
Compared to even the recent COE bid price of $25000 PLUS, my SUPPLY SIDE Quota Control is already FIVE Times cheaper.
You are speculating that the successful Dealership will auction his limited quota stocks to any Buyer who is prepared to succumb to the Dealers' greed for money by AUCTION the limited stock of cars to desparate Buyers.
Does your speculation make any sense ? I can argue in some other directions too just to counter your speculative position, where does debate end when arguments are based on wild speculations and not on reasons ?
Did you not first print in your post - Page 2, 12 October 2003 02:15PM - as follows :-
The DEALER is NOT the one deciding on the PRICE ! Is the MARKET ! Tat is why u got to answer how does Gov select 5000 out of the 50000 ! IF GOV go by highest bidders, than your idea neevr change the PRICE at all !! It will still be stubbornly fixed at 50000 as tat is how much consumer r willing to pay for a car ! U JUST ADDED another LINK to the consumer has THEY HAVE to pay for DEALER's RISK and EFFORT ! THE CHAIN IS STILL
GOV -> Dealer -> Buyer !
I am talking about OWNERSHIP! NOT CAR ! Wat is the origin of COE !! Your stupid chain below is for the CAR !
PRESENT: Gov -> Buyer - where is the Dealer in this path that submit COE bid on behalf of buyers - as a service ?
STUPID IDEA : Gov -> Dealer -> Buyer -
Who do you think "influence" or "advise" the Buyers as to the price to place in their COE application ? Who do you think does all the running around between LTA and the Dealership, to service the Buyers ?
Is your flow path of COE activity and car sales documentation a representation of the Real World, or dented to suit your position ? -
"COE doesn't GET CHEAPER in tis case, and DEALER STILL EARN PROFIT" ? You already stated before that the SUPPLY SIDE Quota System is a 'CHEAPER COE'; and about the profit element - how does your amazing brilliance come to this conclusion, when i had indicated that the Quota Price paid by the Dealership can be forced to be declared with the OMV, ARF and PARF printout in the Log Card.
""
raw materials->pressing plant->vehicle assembly factory->marketing->government->distributor->dealer->government->buyer
""
Why will the Dealership risks its reputation by "milking" the Singaporean Buyers, when the Government enforced the rule of declaring the Quota Price paid, just as the OMV, ARF and PARF are also shown to potential Buyers ?
""
They can enforce the rules, however COE doesn't GET CHEAPER in tis case, and DEALER STILL EARN PROFIT. I have 5000 customers wanting to buy 500 cars for me. Wat does tat means ? It means I can only sell 500 tat month due to your stupid COE. So wat am I going to do, I am going to raise my price for tis month and tell people if they don't like it, wait till next month, of course putting it in a nice way. Wat is the result ? I am still earning more money from the consumer ! Who get to be hurt ? CONSUMER.
You are now turning the nail on its own head, and getting nowhere as you only want to see the end of one nail only.
Okie, then now I have 4500 waiting list to buy the car if above is true, then I am going to bid for 5500 cars tis month. If I cannot get 4500, I have to pay them back a compensation. How am I going to achive tat high amount of cars ? I will RAISE my bidding price or watever means to get the STUPID COE. In the END consumer has to pay me for everything plus my PROFIT AGAIN, so wat is the HARM of telling me wat quota price I had set ?!
Wat solution has your stupid COE done ? INCREASE THE COST OF CUSTOMERS !
If you have 4500 CONFIRMED in your waiting list, and you brilliantly "bid for 5500 cars" - why do you need to compensate 4500 buyers ? If you brilliantly bid for 5500 cars, you will have already received a successful bid of 1000 cars - no ? You need to compensate only 3500 only - no ?
Or did you place a typing error of 5500 cars instead of 4500 cars ?
How do I address your confused position in this paragraph ?
All the same, do not concern yourself too much, leave it to the real experts at the Dealership to take care of themselves IF EVER a SUPPLY SIDE Quota system is implemented, when the Market gets tired with being continuously SCREWED by the Government for "tinkering" with the COE system to suit their cash flow requirement.
Why should the idiom need correction ?
""
I think I better correct your idiom
"A fool and his gold will soon be parted"
Unfortunately, " Atobe" , sad to say, those with money will very unlikely to agree with you.
Keep believing tat no one is rich in Singapore. Tis is probably because none of the people u knew r rich.
""
Unfortunately, the $50 accident actually occurred - if you recall, which shows that there are Singaporeans who are NOT "stupidly smart" and will be more realistic to put in a COE bid price of $1 too.
""
I guess u must be pretty dumb. THERE R PEOPLE tat bid for $1 tat month. There r people tat bid $20, $10 too. BUT THEY FAILED TO WIN THE BID. Why will newspaper report people who put in $1 but lose the bid ? The lowest price tat won the bid tat time is $50. Anything below 50 LOSES. U CAN STILL PUT IN $1, but U lose, Every month there will be jokers placing low bid just for the fun of it.
""
Why do you think the COE system allowed a successful bid of $50 ?
Why do you think the COE system has now changed to DISALLOW another successful bid of $50 ?
If the COE system is TRANSPARENT, then there will be more SENSIBLE Singaporeans bidding around a MORE REALISTIC price to BUY a PAPER to OWN a Car.
You call this people "JOKERS" - who are sensible to pay $1 to $1000 to buy a paper called COE, and will consider people to be "SENSIBLE" to pay up to $90,000 (during the Peak) for a COE paper ? No wonder you live up to your credo of " Stupid-is-Smart " .
When someone look at the world in a Reverse Manner, by believing that being " Stupid is Smart " , one has to be immediately aware that the person has a "reverse personaility ".
Well, I guess it pleased u a lot when I called it stupid COE. Glad u have the IQ to realise I am actually "praising" u. Then I shall carry on calling it stupid COE. ""
When one attend to a person, one has to be aware that this person has some kind of "hang-up" , one has to adapt to the person's level of intelligence. One has to be very patient, firm and clear by making things basically simple.
If you need to be amused, why not ? If that is the only way to coddle you into the Real World that we live in.
It is not about winning an argument, but more to find some kind of middle ground in logical thinking.
I don't know about other people but do u really think u r winning tis argument ? U may consider me spastic, but I do believe tat your suugestions and argument suggest u r [b]brain dead, if u ever start with a brain at all. [/b]
There has been quite a few opportunities in finding a middle ground of mutual agreement, except that you prefer to take on a divergent wild ride into unreasoned speculations.
No, if you read clearly the ending paragraph of my last post, I have given you the benefit of the doubt that "YOU ARE NOT A SPASTIC", so I am not sure of your ability to actually understand and participate in a reasoned exchange of views.
Unfortunately, again, you have shown the hollowness in your approach of reasoning.
If I have no brain at all, will you be engaging me for so many days and hours in the many views that you have responded with ?
Now I am beginning to wonder your capacity to deal with data. -
"COE doesn't GET CHEAPER in tis case, and DEALER STILL EARN PROFIT" ? You already stated before that the SUPPLY SIDE Quota System is a 'CHEAPER COE'; and about the profit element - how does your amazing brilliance come to this conclusion, when i had indicated that the Quota Price paid by the Dealership can be forced to be declared with the OMV, ARF and PARF printout in the Log Card.
""
raw materials->pressing plant->vehicle assembly factory->marketing->government->distributor->dealer->government->buyer
""
Why will the Dealership risks its reputation by "milking" the Singaporean Buyers, when the Government enforced the rule of declaring the Quota Price paid, just as the OMV, ARF and PARF are also shown to potential Buyers ?
""
They can enforce the rules, however COE doesn't GET CHEAPER in tis case, and DEALER STILL EARN PROFIT. I have 5000 customers wanting to buy 500 cars for me. Wat does tat means ? It means I can only sell 500 tat month due to your stupid COE. So wat am I going to do, I am going to raise my price for tis month and tell people if they don't like it, wait till next month, of course putting it in a nice way. Wat is the result ? I am still earning more money from the consumer ! Who get to be hurt ? CONSUMER.
You are now turning the nail on its own head, and getting nowhere as you only one to see the end of one nail only.
Okie, then now I have 4500 waiting list to buy the car if above is true, then I am going to bid for 5500 cars tis month. If I cannot get 4500, I have to pay them back a compensation. How am I going to achive tat high amount of cars ? I will RAISE my bidding price or watever means to get the STUPID COE. In the END consumer has to pay me for everything plus my PROFIT AGAIN, so wat is the HARM of telling me wat quota price I had set ?!
Wat solution has your stupid COE done ? INCREASE THE COST OF CUSTOMERS !
If you have 4500 CONFIRMED in your waiting list, and you brilliantly "bid for 5500 cars" - why do you need to compensate 4500 buyers ? If you brilliantly bid for 5500 cars, you will have already received a successful bid of 1000 cars - no ? You need to compensate only 3500 only - no ?
Or did you place a typing error of 5500 cars instead of 4500 cars ?
How do I address your confused position in this paragraph ?
All the same, do not concern yourself too much, leave it to the real experts at the Dealership to take care of themselves IF EVER a SUPPLY SIDE Quota system is implemented, when the Market gets tired with being continuously SCREWED by the Government for "tinkering" with the COE system to suit their cash flow requirement.
Why should the idiom need correction ?
""
I think I better correct your idiom
"A fool and his gold will soon be parted"
Unfortunately, " Atobe" , sad to say, those with money will very unlikely to agree with you.
Keep believing tat no one is rich in Singapore. Tis is probably because none of the people u knew r rich.
""
Unfortunately, the $50 accident actually occurred - if you recall, which shows that there are Singaporeans who are NOT "stupidly smart" and will be more realistic to put in a COE bid price of $1 too.
""
I guess u must be pretty dumb. THERE R PEOPLE tat bid for $1 tat month. There r people tat bid $20, $10 too. BUT THEY FAILED TO WIN THE BID. Why will newspaper report people who put in $1 but lose the bid ? The lowest price tat won the bid tat time is $50. Anything below 50 LOSES. U CAN STILL PUT IN $1, but U lose, Every month there will be jokers placing low bid just for the fun of it.
""
Why do you think the COE system allowed a successful bid of $50 ?
Why do you think the COE system has not changed to DISALLOW another successful bid of $50 ?
If the COE system is TRANSPARENT, then there will be more SENSIBLE Singaporeans bidding around a MORE REALISTIC price to BUY a PAPER to OWN a Car.
You call this people "JOKERS" - who are sensible to pay $1 to $1000 to buy a paper called COE, and will consider people to be "SENSIBLE" to pay up to $90,000 (during the Peak) for a COE paper ? No wonder you live up to your credo of " Stupid-is-Smart " .
When someone look at the world in a Reverse Manner, by believing that being " Stupid is Smart " , one has to be immediately aware that the person has a "reverse personaility".
Well, I guess it pleased u a lot when I called it stupid COE. Glad u have the IQ to realise I am actually "praising" u. Then I shall carry on calling it stupid COE. ""
When one attend to such a person, one has to be aware that this person has some kind of "hang-up" , one has to adapt to the person's level of intelligence. One has to be very patient, firm and clear by making things basically simple.
If you need to be amused in this debate, why not ? If that is the only way to help you back into the Real World that we live in.
It is not about winning an argument, but more to find some kind of middle ground in logical thinking.
I don't know about other people but do u really think u r winning tis argument ? U may consider me spastic, but I do believe tat your suugestions and argument suggest u r [b]brain dead, if u ever start with a brain at all. [/b]
There has been quite a few opportunities in finding a middle ground of mutual agreement, except that you prefer to take on a divergent wild ride into unreasoned speculations.
No, if you read clearly the ending paragraph of my last post, I "have given you the benefit of the doubt that "YOU ARE NOT A SPASTIC" ". So I am not sure of your ability to actually understand and participate in a reasoned exchange of views.
Unfortunately, again, you have shown the hollowness in your approach of reasoning.
If I have no brain at all, will you be engaging me for so many days and hours in the many views that you have responded with ?
Now I am beginning to wonder your capacity to deal with reality. -
I don't know wat u r good at since u can not answer tis simple question from me. U again choose to ignore tat question as U HAVE NO GOOD ANSWER TO IT. I will ignore other points till u come to senses and answer the question I wanted u to answer. Since u r so brain dead, I will use a more child like approach to explain the situation to u
Once upon a time, there was a small kingdom in the far east. The kingdom is small, as stated in the previous sentence, thus decided to employ SIngapore way of controlling cars, which is COE. The COE gradually rises to a very high level due to the high demand for cars in the kingdom.
Then came a stupid senseless consultant named Atobe and use the "supply" control method of controlling vehicles. The blur and good hearted king decide to use it, and "fine tune" its policy according to Atobe and inform all its citizen about the new changes.
The traffic advisor suggested to open up no more than 5000 COE tat month to establish normal growth, thus king decide to use 5000 as its quota for tat month.
The bidding day come after much anticipaton. To the king surprise, 50,000 bids came in for the 5000 slots available for tat month. The king now do not know how to choose who is getting how much COE available, and he approach back Atobe for the solution.
Imagine u r tat Atobe, how r u going to advise the king on how to select which 5000 bids will get the COE ?
I guess u r still sticking to your point and refusing to answer my question because u have no good answer for it I never know u can be so vulnerable till tis stage, and all tat is holding your stand is creating confusion by answer a different question to the one posed, and trying to make the other party sounds silly, thus moltivated to stop asking tat question. Com'on, is tat all u can do ?
If u refuse to answer tis question, it proves U R JUST A TALK C,O,C,K person who being such a big coward, using verbal slippiness, to ignore a simple problem posed. Clearly one tat had known tat is the biggest loop hole in his solution. If u refuse to answer tis one question, then talking more doesn't mean anything as tis is one of the fundamental element in your solution, and u have no solution to it. I will treat all those comments insulting my IQ level as a way of u trying to escape notice, and will treat u no greater than a naughty boy trying to avoid answering a question by creating distractions.
If u think I am speechless about all your other points, then think again. I want u to be focus on tis one question and tis one question only. ANSWER IT PLAIN AND SIMPLE. -
A got a business plan and want to sell it to a group of capitalists. B, an experienced person also attended the presentation. On his presentation, tis is the exchanges tat took place.
A : As u all can see, if u do A,B,C, then u will get back your investments and much more
B : (sensing something not practical with business plan) Tat is very good, but wat happened if D,E,F happened ?
A : (realised a loop hole in D and E. However pride does not allowed him to admit it) Okie, if u do A', B' and C', then it will solve question F of your problem, now is there any other ques..
B : Tat is very interesting, but I think u haven't answer question D and E
A : I thought I told u A', B' C' already right ?
B : Yes but tat is for question F, how about D and e ?
A : I have told u so many times it is A', B' and C' already. R u deaf or stupid ?
B : I want u to answer D and E ? I know F, and A', B', C' doesn't address question D & E at all ! I want to know your answer for D and E !
A : As I said, it is A', B' and C' for F! I have told u so many times already I can't believe your spastic intelligence
B : HEY ! I am asking plain and simple question, D and E happen, then WAT ??
A : I am not going to answer question F so many times. I think u better go home and sleep, I shall now carry on....
B : Wat ?? Hey, answer D and E for goodness sake !
A : Hey stupid, haven't I told u enough ? Get lost !!
..................................................................