Singapore income tax highest in the world???
-
cont
Why do you not extract the quote in its full content, so that the entire post here from you, will make some sense ?Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Wat do u think is wrong with tat statement ? If u wanna ask Gov direct, they will give u a more politically correct and lenghty explanation only. It is true I came up with the above conclusion, but so u see any flaws in it ?
That is what you think the Government is doing, but is this based on another speculation and not from substance ?
Or are you just too shy of what had transpired ? Let us look at the full post that led to this juncture ?
U already question on whether "old folks home" get any money isn't it ? I have said tis before3. Gov decision is to let the richer people be the ones tat will own a car. However to be fair to the rest of the population, he will tax the richer people heavily and used it to lower the tax and burden on the poor. I do not see anything wrong with tis method. [/quote]
That is what you think the Government is doing, but is this based on another speculation and not from substance ?
Nothing from the COE collected from all the car biddings has ever been accounted for that benefits any Old Folks home.Originally posted by stupidissmart:
[quote]Are you not being quirky here ?
You talk about Gov taxing the rich by using the COE to spend on the Poor on the one hand, but you prefer that I "don't tell me more Gov expenditure facts tat u already said before". When did I speak about "Gov expenditures"; other then to rebutt your idea that COE is used to the road systems.
Interesting that you should declare that the Question in this discussion is whether it is an appropriate tax ?
Gov will spend the same amount of money every year, whether COE was present or not. If u remove COE, then Gov will look into other way to get back tis offset. How do they do it ? They may raise property tax or raise GST, making living worse for everyone.
On touching COE, only a small fraction of the whole Singapore population get to have cars. We have to decide who get to own the car who can't. Gov method is to let the rich people get to be the ones having the convenience of the cars, but they must do it with a price. The price of COE and other road tax.
Hasn't tat been fair to both the rich and the poor, in the sense tat the Rich get to pay more Tax, while the Poor cannot have the luxury of the car. Let say considering only on tis aspect, do u think tis is fair ?
This question had been dealt with later.I guess you cannot possibly be a vehicle owner, let alone having a driving license.
As was mentioned in the preceding page, with the Present COE System, the Rich can afford to submit prices at the very highest - just to guarantee themselves a place.
However, it is the "Not-so-Rich" and the "Poor", who will lose out, as their bid prices may not be sufficiently high to win them a place at the top of the pile.
Ironically, the prices submitted by the "Not-so-Rich" and the "Poor" will be used as the ACCEPTED COE Bid Price. -
cont
Here is a fine example of your DESPICABLE manner in debate, by taking what you need to prove YOUR point in a most DISHONEST way of debate by taking my paragraphs out of context.Originally posted by stupidissmart:It is easy to speak of someone but until you show how I have done anything that you have accused me of doing, the fact remains quite clear that you have been dishonest in the manner that you have selectively misquoted from my posts, for the simplistic objective of scoring points in an argument that you refused to conduct in a sensible manner.
Tat is very interesting, please elaborate.
Would you consider your failed attempt in dishonest extract from another person's post, just to score points for yourselves ?
Why did you make only a partial quote from my post (print in Blue) and [b]LEFT OUT the critical part (shown in Red) that should have been read as a COMPLETE WHOLE ?[/b]
You DELIBERATELY left out the continuing part now repeated in Red :
The average median price will be $6,200.
All the 20 dealers in the 4th Group will get their application for the FIRST Quota Lot of 50 cars at $6,200 per car.
The other dealers in the 3rd and 5th Group, being the nearest to the average median price will be offered this average median price of $6,200.
While those in the 1st, 2nd and 6th groups will be offered the remaining Quota in equal proportions.
Now, does this indicate that only 20 Dealers is successful and ALL the OTHER Dealers get NOTHING ?
Why do you try so hard to discredit the SUPPLY SIDE Quota System, when all it does is to IMPROVE on the Present COE - (as said by you to be a CHEAPER COE) - by allowing a LOWER 4-digit valuation as a Base Price for bidding to begin ?
Is it worth any of my effort to reply to the other WILD SPECULATIVE and BASELESS ASSUMPTIONS that you have made ?
Tat is again very interesting. I have stated before
[quote]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 ?
1. Can u 100% say tat ALL cars are sold by advance orders NOW, INCLUDING 2nd Hand cars Dealers ? [/b][/quote]
How "advance" before you no longer accept it as "Advance Orders" ?
Most Car Salesmen will demand a commitment fee or deposit to be paid at the time of order, especially when most cars are now packaged with a COE included.
This is to give all Buyers the convenience of One-Stop-Convenience to obtain COE, Car Insurance, as well as supply or upgrading of accessories.
Even Second-hand car dealers are also working along the same lines.
Unfortunately, from the assumptions that you have made about car ownerships, it is wishful thinking on your part, and it looks like you have never own a car before.
2. Do u not think tis is an added value if I can let u OWN the car the [b]minute u want to buy it AND NOT having to wait for a full month ? [/b]
For your information, even when you order a car, you will have to wait at least a minimum of three to four days.to have several issues resolved. Without any complications, the earliest that a Buyer can take over possession of his car, will be at least three days.Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Look again at the financial cost of holding high price COE, or high cost vehicle stocks that are financed by the Banks, and you will note that a new scheme will have to be thought out for the car industry.
[quote]But r u sure u will only bid for 323 exact, without leaving any extra COE to play with ? R u sure the whole of next month there won't be any buyer tat buy cars within a shorter time of thinking ? I can see the possibility of potential people just go over to a show room, test a car and decided to buy it straight. Since there r willing buyers willing to book for a month before getting the car, isn't it better to tell them tat they can drive away with the car they want without having to wait at all.Tis can only be achieved since the company has the extra COE with them. Won't an extra stock of COE help to facilitate such transaction and bring convenience to the buyers ?Originally posted by stupidissmart:
I guess we cannot assume to be "jack of all trades and master of none"; either one is good at one thing, or in attempting to be good at more then one thing, we may end up being useless in both.
[b]
Clearly u consider yourself to be a fiancial whiz, but lack any clue on [b]sales nor stock keeping. I guess u can just stick holding tat title if u like to belittle other while bloating up your face so much.
[/b]
Try harder to be an expert in sales and stock keeping, and it will be a wonder how you will make any money in the real world.
To help you along the way, use alot more common sense, logic and a positive open mind, then perhaps you will reach the nirvana of knowledge. Unfortunately, those that proscribed in the World of Reverse Oder may not be too adapt at such rudimentary skills of common sense, logic, and having an open mind. -
The Present COE have the following features - as was mentioned in my post on this thread - Page 4 - 22 October 2003 - 12:39P.M.Originally posted by |-|05|:Actually i do not see how the new system proposed will be any different from the old COE......Both are supply and demand influenced.Both see the cars going to the highest bidder......and both see's the money end up with the goverment.So how is it different if it's the company bidding or the person bidding?The availbility is still goverment contorlled and the price is still contorlled by how much people can pay...
printed below:
1. The COE is a quota system by itself, by limiting the MONTHLY Quantity of Vehicles allowed to be sold Per Month. (It is NOT a Tax System - and is unfortunately not a fair way) .
2. Anyone is allowed to submit a bid for a COE and there is NO AGE LIMIT, EXCEPT that the insurance certificate must cover the successful bidder who is the certified driver and owner of the vehicle.
3. The COE price is NOT determined by the TOP VALUES of ALL COE received, but taken from the LOWEST VALUE of the last REJECTED BID PRICE - (which LTA termed as "Reserve Price" ) .
4. COE is awarded by a complex system of accepting the APPLICANTS submitting the TOP VALUES, but they need to PAY ONLY the price of the LAST REJECTED BID PRICE.
For example, if there are only 5000 COE available for this month:
First group of 3000 Persons (Buyers or Dealers) submit bids of $10,000
Second group of 2000 Persons submit bids of $11,000
Third group of 1000 Persons submit bids of $12,000
Fourth group of 1000 Persons submit bids of $15,000
Fifth group of 1000 Persons submit bids of $20,000
Sixth group of 1000 Persons submit bids of $50,000
Seventh Group of 1000 Persons submit bids of $60,000
The 5000 applicants submitting the TOP VALUES will be awarded, and those people from the Third Group to the Seventh Group - each of 1000 persons will be the successful winner.
However, they DO NOT PAY the values of what they have submitted, as the COE Price is determined at the LAST UNSUCCESSFUL BID PRICE - which is the value submitted by the SECOND Group at $12,000.
LTA will charge $12,000 PLUS $1.00 - (GST to be separtely paid).
This is the mechanism in which COE determine who amongst a LARGE group of BUYERS will be awarded with a limited quantity of COE.
IS THIS A FAIR APPROACH IN DISTRIBUTING THE COE ?
There is no assurance that the system is TRANSPARENT, as some people do experience a problem of entering a GENUINE LOW PRICE BID, which the system reject at a fixed time within the day.
When DEALERS are allowed to bid for COE to allow them to sell their stocks of vehicles, and by allowing them to pay only a TOKEN FEE with their submission, they will simply join in the mad rush to be at the top of the heap of desparate COE bidders.
The nett effect is for the wild speculative swings of COE prices over a period of six months.
In the SUPPLY SIDE Quota System, it will feature the following:
(1) The DEALER will only bid for a limited stock of approved vehicles to be sold.
(2) The limited stock of vehicles that are allowed to be sold can be auctioned off in Quota Lots of fixed quantities of cars, which the DEALERS can bid for the number of Quota Lots that they dare to hold in stock.
(3) The DEALERS must pay UP-FRONT the FULL VALUE of the bidding price per car quantity, or per Quota Lot of cars.
This is intended to cut out the speculative element by forcing the DEALERS to behave in a rational and responsible manner when bidding for the right to sell the limited quantities of cars.
(4) The successful bid price for the Quota Lot, will be determined by the largest MEDIAN of hits at which the prices are received.
The nett result will be those who are alone bidding at the High End or at the other Low End, will be the ones being unsuccessful.
The SUPPLY SIDE Quota Control System will serve as a DAMPENER to any market manipulation and provide stability in an otherwise speculative market for COE during the weekend Turf Club Races.
As was previously mentioned, this proposal may require further development and tweaking, but its application is very wide. -
I always thought there were 2 types of COE bidding which have different prices.....?Originally posted by Atobe:The Present COE have the following features - as was mentioned in my post on this thread - Page 4 - 22 October 2003 - 12:39P.M.
printed below:
1. The COE is a quota system by itself, by limiting the MONTHLY Quantity of Vehicles allowed to be sold Per Month. (It is NOT a Tax System - and is unfortunately not a fair way) .
2. Anyone is allowed to submit a bid for a COE and there is NO AGE LIMIT, EXCEPT that the insurance certificate must cover the successful bidder who is the certified driver and owner of the vehicle.
3. The COE price is NOT determined by the TOP VALUES of ALL COE received, but taken from the LOWEST VALUE of the last REJECTED BID PRICE - (which LTA termed as "Reserve Price" ) .
4. COE is awarded by a complex system of accepting the APPLICANTS submitting the TOP VALUES, but they need to PAY ONLY the price of the LAST REJECTED BID PRICE.
For example, if there are only 5000 COE available for this month:
First group of 3000 Persons (Buyers or Dealers) submit bids of $10,000
Second group of 2000 Persons submit bids of $11,000
Third group of 1000 Persons submit bids of $12,000
Fourth group of 1000 Persons submit bids of $15,000
Fifth group of 1000 Persons submit bids of $20,000
Sixth group of 1000 Persons submit bids of $50,000
Seventh Group of 1000 Persons submit bids of $60,000
The 5000 applicants submitting the TOP VALUES will be awarded, and those people from the Third Group to the Seventh Group - each of 1000 persons will be the successful winner.
However, they DO NOT PAY the values of what they have submitted, as the COE Price is determined at the LAST UNSUCCESSFUL BID PRICE - which is the value submitted by the SECOND Group at $12,000.
LTA will charge $12,000 PLUS $1.00 - (GST to be separtely paid).
This is the mechanism in which COE determine who amongst a LARGE group of BUYERS will be awarded with a limited quantity of COE.
IS THIS A FAIR APPROACH IN DISTRIBUTING THE COE ?
There is no assurance that the system is TRANSPARENT, as some people do experience a problem of entering a GENUINE LOW PRICE BID, which the system reject at a fixed time within the day.
When DEALERS are allowed to bid for COE to allow them to sell their stocks of vehicles, and by allowing them to pay only a TOKEN FEE with their submission, they will simply join in the mad rush to be at the top of the heap of desparate COE bidders.
The nett effect is for the wild speculative swings of COE prices over a period of six months.
In the SUPPLY SIDE Quota System, it will feature the following:
(1) The DEALER will only bid for a limited stock of approved vehicles to be sold.
(2) The limited stock of vehicles that are allowed to be sold can be auctioned off in Quota Lots of fixed quantities of cars, which the DEALERS can bid for the number of Quota Lots that they dare to hold in stock.
(3) The DEALERS must pay UP-FRONT the FULL VALUE of the bidding price per car quantity, or per Quota Lot of cars.
This is intended to cut out the speculative element by forcing the DEALERS to behave in a rational and responsible manner when bidding for the right to sell the limited quantities of cars.
(4) The successful bid price for the Quota Lot, will be determined by the largest MEDIAN of hits at which the prices are received.
The nett result will be those who are alone bidding at the High End or at the other Low End, will be the ones being unsuccessful.
The SUPPLY SIDE Quota Control System will serve as a DAMPENER to any market manipulation and provide stability in an otherwise speculative market for COE during the weekend Turf Club Races.
As was previously mentioned, this proposal may require further development and tweaking, but its application is very wide.
Anyway even for the supply side bidding it can be easily brushed aside by dealers by them making sure they have already sold the cars before even bidding.They could then pass the cost of the bidding to the buy thus driving up car prices which admitantly was what the COE was suppose to do.However it might makes cars too expensive -
Sure there are several categories of COE for different size or engine capacity cars.Originally posted by |-|05|:I always thought there were 2 types of COE bidding which have different prices.....?
Anyway even for the supply side bidding it can be easily brushed aside by dealers by them making sure they have already sold the cars before even bidding.They could then pass the cost of the bidding to the buy thus driving up car prices which admitantly was what the COE was suppose to do.However it might makes cars too expensive
There is also the category of cars exceeding the first 10 Years due for renewal - which is dependent on the average of the COE prices for the preceding 3 months.
A DEALER will eventually pass the cost of the bidding to the BUYER, but AT A MUCH LOWER COST than what the Present COE system is allowing.
In the Proposed SUPPLY SIDE Quota, the Quota Price will be LOWER than the Present COE, as the MINIMUM EXPECTED Bid Price is clearly indicated, and the DEALERS will simply bid at percentage points OVER or BELOW the Minimum Bid Price - which I have indicated as $5,000 for the purpose of this forum discussion.
This Low Starting Quota Price is to challenge the Government's declared position that the COE is a tool to control the growth of the vehicle population, and is NOT a tool for Revenue Collection.
The Quota Price PER CAR from a Quota Lot can be displayed in the Vehicle Log Card, much as what has been displayed at present the information concerning OMV, PARF, and COE values.
In a SUPPLY SIDE Quota System, the DEALER (or DEALERS) will have to bid carefully in its rush to get their allotted Quotas.
In all likelihood, the DEALERs will obtain confirmed bookings and place their bids according to such bookings.
If the DEALERS decide to hold stocks that will be OVER the quantity of Confirmed Bookings, they will have to decide carefully, as the FULL VALUE of the Quota Bid Price will have to be paid in FULL at TIME of BIDDING.
The Cost of Funds in holding EXCESS STOCKS will have to be carefully considered, and if the stock are not sold beyond a certain time frame, it will only make the stock costlier, and profit margins thinner.
Try passing on such cost to an experienced Buyer, and it will be a hard act to accomplish - unless if the Buyer is a "tender foot" buying his first car. -
i think that, even in a supply side quota, the prices will still be as high.
the problem with such auction style balloting, is that there wil always be people with too much money to spend, and those are the ones that will keep the prices high.
even if like you said, that the dealer has to pay upfront the price of the COE 1st, there are 2 ways to circumvent this, the easier of which would simply be to 1st sell the car together with an estimated bid price. where refunds would be made if there was any left over from the bidding.
the other would be to get a bank loan, which wouldn't be too hard too, as they can use their stock of cars as collateral. the banks would also be rather willing to offer such loans, as they're short term based, even at 15% per month, they would still be earning quite a sum, considering that it'll be a constant flow of income every month. -
Try passing on such cost to an experienced Buyer, and it will be a hard act to accomplish - unless if the Buyer is a "tender foot" buying his first car.
Try passing on?The dealer doesnt have to try he can.Why?The buyer doesnt have a choice since the certs can only be applied for by the car dealer.Meaning if he doesnt pay he will NEVER get the car.Unlike the COE where by if the dealer doesnt want to bid for him the buyer can bid himself!!And also whatever Nismo that no matter how low the intial bid is those who want the car and have cash to spare WILL bid higher and drive the price up.Like the COE was started pretty low....i remember my dad paying no more then $10k when it 1st started out(i think it might be $5k) -
If you continue with this line of ridiculous reply, we will have a debate without you understanding the crux of the questions asked.
I do not know whether is my ENGLISh tat bad or your interpretation is lousy.
What is the basis of your reply that when "more people chasing a limited 'quality' COE offered, then the price will just get higher and cut off the demand till it reaches the number of bidding and the number of quota coincide" ?
Another gut feeling or wild speculation ?
How the price get higher and cut off demand till it ( what is this " IT " ? ) reaches the number of bidding and the number of quota con-incide
What are you thinking about with your post about "number of bidding and the number of quota co-inciding" ?
Are you referring to a real live event that occurred with the Present COE system, so much so that it will also happen with my Proposed SUPPLY SIDE Quota ? Or is this another of your baseless and argumentative kind of speculation that YOU MUST OFFER just to justify and advance your own position ?
NOW IN THE PRESENT COE, THERE ARE MORE BIDDERS THAN THE QUOTA SET BY THE GOV. If Gov released 5000 COE tis month, the number of BID will be >>5000. However in the end, 5000, and only 5000 people will get the COEs. How does the Gov make its selection then ? THEY AWARD COE TO THE people tat had BID THE MOST. If there are 50000 bid for the 5000 COEs offered tis month, then the TOP 5000 people get the COE. TAT IS THE PRESENT SYSTEM !Was there a refusal from me, or was there a difficulty encountered with the manner that your line of questioning had presented itself ?
FIRST, I must emphasise tat I AM NOT ASKING ABOUT DEALER SIDE. I AM ASKING IF OVERBIDDING OCCURS AT GOV SIDE, not DEALER SIDE. In your present system, dealer only need to worry about its supply of CARS. IN YOUR SYSTEM, dealer had to worry about THE COE as well. WHY ADD PROBLEM to the SYSTEM ?
Surely, with your brilliance you could stretch some creativity beyond being " stupidissmart " kind of logic.
What will you as a Dealer do when you are confronted with a limited stock of cars to be sold, and a long waiting list of interested buyers ?
Big marque car dealeres have always encountered this situation, but they do not seem to have any problems dealing with this long list of waiting buyers - whether with a "Ballot Box" Policy or with a "First Come, First Serve" Policy.
Why do you have this persistent problem ?If you had been a little more attentive to details of my postings - (and rein in your urge to "shoot your mouth from your hips" with your "Ah Ha, I got you" attitude, and your eagerness to cut up my post into shreds and ending up with most of the bits in your mouth) - you will perhaps have read in my post on Page 1-10 October 2003-02:54A.M. featuring the IMPORTANT FEATURES of a SUPPLY SIDE Quota System; as well as the follow-on explanations given on the same date at 11:24A.M. (also on Page 1).
I am not ASKING ABOUT wat your idea is all about. The QUESTIONS above is asking about your method of selection USING YOUR infamous MEDIAN method. Don't give me a link to somthing tat is waaaaaaAAAAAAAaaaaay past describing your STUPID idea again. I am talking about the USELESSNESS of your MEDIAN method, which u haven't even mentioned at tat date.
Click here to go directly to Page 1, and scroll down to 10 October 2003 - 02:54A.M. - as well as at 11:24A.M.
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=58787&page=0
If you cannot understand or accept the first explanation given, then we are perpetually debating an issue in circles, since your inability to differentiate the features between the Present COE System and the Proposed SUPPLY SIDE Quota System.
If u aren't such a slimeball, why don't u try to asnwer the above questions first ? I think I better rewrite it in NUMBER form otherwise your failed interpretation will result in u sliming away from the direct line of fire.
1. If u r using median approach, why not let the buyer bid for it directly and CUT off DEALER in this chain ? The dealer just concentrate on selling cars and buyer has more flexibility. And using your method, the DEALER still has to use ballot BOX again to determine who is the lucky buyer again. Thus u r using 2 steps while mine involves only 1 step.
2. Median approach is making use of luck. It has a lot of loopholes like monopoly. Example, Gov want to release 5000 COE tis month. I want to buy in ALL the COE tis month so tat I can control the market. Tis is how I bid
Amount Number
$100 ------- 5000
$101 ------- 5000
$99 --------- 5000
$102 --------- 5000
$98----------- 5000
I just carry on, in the end, I will GET ALL THE 5000 COE paying only $100 for each. I only need to spend $500 000, which is just 10 COE in the present.
3. Thus in view of the above loophole, why not use the BALLOT BOX ? Tat is more superior than the MEDIAN isn't it ?
U better try to answer the above question. IF u still wanna use your old past replies, please cut it out and paste it on the following number. Don't be a slimeball again and ignore answering tis huh. If u do, I will PASTE the whole portion above everytime I reply to u. U can always choose to ignore it but it just shows how pathetic your points are.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 interprete my points again... I am saying tat presently the highest 5000 bidders get to have the COE. And the price in your NEW model will still be the same as the PRESENT model. If it isn't the same, YOUR new idea will charge the BUYER higher. So it is important for u to tell me a foolproof Gov method of selection. As I see above, u fail to come up with any.
Tat is very funny, wat is wrong with it ? Is tat your reply on issues tat u fail to understand or fail to convince ? Frankly, your WHOLE IDEA, SUPPLY MECHANISM AND USING MEDIAN BLA BLA BLA IS ""based on speculation, and on your concept that is suited in a test laboratory - which can only experiment a market environment based on your limited understanding of the real world dynamics that you have only a superficial concept in"" If u talking about lab scenario etc, u r the BIGGEST idiot tat start all this. So u gonna tell me u can use watever "test laboratory" u want while I can't. Well well well, j,e,r,k always think they r special, thus can entitles them to special powers while denying other from it isn't it ?
Your concern again, is based on speculation, and on your concept that is suited in a test laboratory - which can only experiment a market environment based on your limited understanding of the real world dynamics that you have only a superficial concept in
Before u say I didn't completely quote youe reply, look belowReplying to your post in a reverse order - what makes you think that all the Dealers in Singapore will not be having the same problem - if each of them have a share from the limited quota of 5000 cars or vehicles allowed to be sold in Singapore ?
Frankly, from your first para, I don't get your question. U r complaining tat the quotas released from Gov is too low or u r complaining about wat ?
From the Present COE system that require BUYERS to bid at the highest values, so as to scramble to the top of the bidders, but only pay at the LAST HIGHEST BID PRICE that lost out, is this fair to those who have placed the bid price that is used by those WINNING HIGHEST BIDDERS to pay for the COE ?
Second para, I don't understand a thing. Does anyone out there do ? Wat r u trying to say ?
I have asked some questions regarding about your MEDIAN method. Tis is a reminder for u to reply them.
Will it not be a fairer system, in which your bid price is placed with the highest percentage median, and those around the highest number median will be awarded the COE ?
This will act as a dampener to the wild speculation in COE Price, in which anonymity is assured, and there is no guarantee that the bid price is not from the Government fixing the price to their own desired value.To further enhance the dampening speculative effect and to bring some degree of sanity to the car values, in the Proposed SUPPLY SIDE Quota - the Dealers will have to fork out the full sum of their bids for any quota lots that they have planned to market, or based on confirmed bookings received from actual Buyers.
Reply from u about usage of bank.
All this benefits from a SUPPLY SIDE Quota can be achieved if the Government decide NOT to capitalise and greedily gain from the insatiable desires of Singaporeans to own cars at any COE price.With your hypothetical scenario given, is this not an exercise in speculation on the part of the Dealers ?
Tat is very funny, u r using PRESENT COE again for your NEW model. I am talking about using LOANS for your NEW MODEL. Up till not, your new model COE price is FIXED every month isn't it ? (Unless u wanna talk about overcharging your overcharging theory again) Now u r using the PRESENT scenario for your NEW model.
How many of them have actually suffered losses when successfully bidding COE at $36,000 for each COE during July, only to see the next COE price falling to $29,000 in August, and then lower again in September to $26,000 - all values being hypothetical but has occurred over the last six months sliding COE prices.
Do you think that Buyers will take over the cost of COE bought at $36,000 and left over from July ?
What is the cost of the loan from the Bank for the $36,000 PER COE ?
Did you not read of some Dealership that went bust, as a result of COE speculation ?
With the SUPPLY SIDE Quota System, the element of speculation is removed, and price is stabilised - as was explained in my post over the last two dates.
If DEALER use bank as a buffer WHEN YOUR NEW MODEL of COE IS ENFORCED, WAT CONTROL MECHANISM have your NEW model came up with ?
Hence I got to ask tis question. In your NEW MODEL, do the price varies every month ?? If not, then answer the below again.quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you not think that Rational Behavior will not be practised in a SUPPLY SIDE SYSTEM that require the Dealer to reconsider his strategy MORE PRUDENTLY - ( since he now has to include the FULL VALUE of his bids AT THE TIME of BID SUBMISSIONS ) - than when he need only to submit $100 per COE application and pay the full amount when the COE is actually taken up - ( as allowed in the Present COE system) ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Dealer DO NOT lower the number of COE they BID, EVEN IF they have to PAY UP for the FULL amount of COE UPFRONT. DEALERS BID in the number of CARS they believe THEY will SELL within tat MONTH. If they can't sell off ALL the COE tat month, then they will just have to bid LESSER for the following month. In tat case they won't have SURPLUS stock of COE holding up for too long. And they do not even have to FORK out a single cent since they can borrow directly from the BANK. If I buy in the COE, and may risk to hold it at most 2 months, then I will SET THE ADDITIONAL BANK FEES TO ALL THE buyers for 2 months.
Hyptothetical figures. Dealer bidding for Oct
COE I hold : 0
July 572
Aug 963
Sep 782
Last year Oct 945
This figure is already fluctuating much greater than wat NORMAL Dealer face. If I am the above dealer, I will bid 800-900 cars tat month. Lets say I bought in 900 for Oct. However in tat month, I don't get to sell off ALL 900 COE, I only sold off 500. Then for the next month, I will
COE I HOLD : 400
Aug 963
Sep 782
Oct 500
Last year Nov 735
Then I may just bid for 200-300 tis month. Lets say I bid for 300, and tis month sale is bad again, I sell of 550 again. But then I had already cleared off the 400 COE I had bought last month. Take note tat I AM CHARGING FOR 2 MONTHS interest when I sell it off to the buyer. Hence in the END, I turn out to be making a profit instead of a loss.
Tis is in the belief tat I will get the EXACT number of cars I bid from the Gov. If I use median method or something else, I may get LESSER number of COE tat month. If I DO NOT get tat amount, In other words, I bid for 900 on Oct but get only 300, won't tat just clears up my COE surplus faster. If I use advance booking as wat U suggested, meaning the buyers have to bid in ADVANCE, then the RISKS involved GET lower again.
So in the end, WAT HAS YOUR IDEA CONTRIBUTED ? Wat CONTROL mechanism has it achieved ?If in a market of 5000 car buyers, all able to obtain 5000 COE, enabling them to go to whichever Dealerships - (note the Plural in this case, and not your constant SINGULAR terms) - do you think that in a SUPPLY SIDE Quota System, the same 5000 car buyers cannot already confirmed their interests with whichever DEALERSHIPS that they have decided on ?
Again u have fail to understand my question. U r using your MEDIAN method right ? Assuming it DOES WORK, it also means tat if tat DEALER is BIDDING for 5000 COE, HE MAY ONLY END UP WITH 50.
With the confirmed orders in hand, do you think that the DEALERSHIPS will not have got ACCURATE DATA to decide the actual Quota Lots size to bid ?
In the present, for the dealer, whoever get the 5000 COE is none of his concern, since he has got the market share. So tis will end up as ANOTHER loophole of your MEDIAN method.The problem with your kind of argument is that you will not consume your own output that you dare to throw at others, when it clearly shows that your thoughts are based on "garbage in and garbage out" with little purpose and directions.
Heh. I can throw u in all direction looking for answer too, but I am not as lazy as someone. The conclusion u derive is incredible just because I demand u to cut your necessary portion off and paste it here. It saves everybody time isn't it ? Or perhaps u discover there is nothing worth cutting off from there too??
When faced with reality, you simply prefer to brush everthing aside.
This is the result of being too involved in your World of Reverse Order that require matters to be kept simple, as any dense matters involving LOGIC will be too much for a confused mind to absorb.Have you ever tried to bid for a COE, or have you actually got involved with a Vehicle Sales Transaction before ?
I try to rephrase for u.
Have you even spoken to any Car Dealers or conducted a general research - by simple conversation - with different dealerships concerning the "mystery" of how some foolish Singaporeans can buck the GENERAL DESIRE to pay the lowest COE Bid Price of ONLY 3 or 4 FIGURE VALUES ?
Have you ever wondered why the LTA Computer System will react by rejecting bids of 3 or 4 figure values, and persistently "push" the prices higher to the 5 figure values ?
Even when economic times are good, sensible persons will still not bid beyond the 2 to 4 figure values, and the person who was lucky to have won a $50 COE is a successful entrepreneur - submitting and winning his bid during the best time of Singapore's economy.
Unfortunately for you, it maybe difficult for someone like you from a World of Reverse Order to comprehend, but sensible people do exist in Singapore, and most of them are businessmen, hard working professionals who earn their money the hard way.
U saying tat COE CAN WORK in the way I describe it out, but based on rumours and your own thinking, u think tat someone out there has tis big conspiracy tat want to milk everyone dry ?
From 3rd para, u saying tat LTA computer system reject 2-4 figures values, yet on 4th para u realised tat someone managed to get COE with $50 ? If wat u say is true, why will tat happened ? Can u give a valid reason why will he get away with $50 ? I thought the comp from LTA will reject "him" aside and ask him to bid for 5 figures COE ?
My explanation : If u explain tat he got $50 is because he is lucky, then tat means the whole system is clean. There IS NO FAIRY TALES LIKE GOV WANT TO SUCK US DRY ETC.What happen to your observation that when prices are cheap, bidders will try to assure themselves a place by BIDDING HIGH ?
Well, if GLC TAXI companies r playing cheat, why doesn't they bid when the price is $50 ?? It can't get any lower than tis isn't it ?
What happen to your observation that when prices are cheap, people rush in to grab the limited stocks of COE and push the price high ?
Can a GLC Taxi company - needing to renew their entire fleet of 500 cars - be so lucky to win in a bidding to obtain all the required 500 COEs ?
It does not take a Financial Whiz to have such keen observations, but it sure need a lot of common sense to know when there is an anomaly in the system that favors one group so easily.Why should it be a problem to find people bidding for $50000 and above ?
Wat is tis ? Slandering the Gov ? Wat is the proof ? Wat is your basis ? Why do u say tat ?
It happened, even up to $90,000 for a simple piece of paper that cost less then 0.01cent.
Then again, you miss the point of the question, in your simplistic view of the post.
In an auction, there will be a minimum price for a product to be sold, and this minimum price is set by the owner of the product.
In the Present COE system, the COE price is silently pushed and controlled from "behind the scene", especially in an electronically bid system that automatically cut off a certain bid prices at a certain fixed time. This automatically timed cutting out the ability of a bidder to submit a desired price, can only be a result of manual intervention when the software was written. This is to prevent another repeat of the supposedly "fluke" $50 COE.How brilliant that you can suddenly forget your own posted position of a surge in demand when things get cheap.
From first para. Tat is strange, u finally accept tat when price drops, demand increases. However Demand is from BUYER side isn't it ? Thus if they bid in 800, if demand increases, then they manage to sell 900. Wat has TAT got to do with wat u saying ?
The remaining stock that is left unsold, is based on your assumption "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." - Page 2 - 11 October 2003 - 11:38 P.M.
I think it will be a useless exercise to go into a discussion with you, on the financial aspect of compound interests of a Bank Loan for a Dealer to purchase stocks.
I think u have missed out my desciption below bah ? Please read through ALL my posting before replying. It is not good practise to read a para and reply a para without first reading the whole thing.I have said that my detailed explanations as to how to implement the Proposed SUPPLY SIDE Quota may not be the final solutions, which will require some further tweaking to improve.
Firstly, your idea NEED COMPLETE OVERHAUL. It does not need tweaking at ALL. It is hopeless
I have indicated quite a few times, that in practise the Present COE System and the Proposed SUPPLY SIDE Quota System have quite a few similarities, as well as marked differences too.
It was also repeated that the SUPPLY SIDE Quota System will bring down the price of the Present COE system, and dampen the wild speculative element found in the Present COE system.
Examples were offered as such, and from the manner in which the Present COE System is awarded, fairness is the last thing that is being achieved - when wild speculative bid submissions can be made at a high level, so as to be at the top of the pile, but no worry is needed, as the price paid will be at the LAST HIGHEST LOSING PRICE.
Is there a need to prove you wrong, and I am right ?
Second, before talking about ADVANTAGES your model is, it is best to ask whether will it work in first place. I can come up with a millions ideas with advantages better than yours but it won't work. Wat is the point if it won't work ?
If u aren't rich, don't bid. If u r "NOT SO RICH" or "POOR", live with public transport. Tat is all. If u still wanna bid, then u can only blame yourself.
So again, you need to be spoon fed to see the difference.
The richest bidders bid at the highest price, and get the COE.
The price that the richest bidder pay is the price that the "NOT SO RICH" or "POOR" Buyers bid at and become the losers.Where do you think the Government had the budget to spend before the COE scheme was implemented during the 1980s ?
From other sources. However it does have the effect on not implementing new taxes from that time onwards.
Where do you think the COE collections are sent to after being accounted and audited ?
I ask u tis myself, where do u think the COE r sent to after being accounted and audited ?I would not consider 10 to 20 percent of the population owning cars to be a small fraction.
Wat is your point of saying tis ? How has Gov ill treat u ?
If your brilliant guess work is correct, that there are 1 million cars, then do you think that this sizeable population deserves better treatment from the Government ?Why do you not extract the quote in its full content, so that the entire post here from you, will make some sense ?
Okie, u have quoted it out in full, I will still give the same reply
Or are you just too shy of what had transpired ? Let us look at the full post that led to this juncture ?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Gov decision is to let the richer people be the ones tat will own a car. However to be fair to the rest of the population, he will tax the richer people heavily and used it to lower the tax and burden on the poor. I do not see anything wrong with tis method.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That is what you think the Government is doing, but is this based on another speculation and not from substance ?
Nothing from the COE collected from all the car biddings has ever been accounted for that benefits any Old Folks home.
Wat do u think is wrong with tat statement ? If u wanna ask Gov direct, they will give u a more politically correct and lenghty explanation only. It is true I came up with the above conclusion, but so u see any flaws in it ?I guess you cannot possibly be a vehicle owner, let alone having a driving license.
Wat is your definition of "Not-so-rich" or "poor" ? Someone who can afford to bid for COE and buy a car or someone WHO doesn't have the ability to bid and buy a car ? They already belong to the "rich" class of people when they bid for cars. If u aren't, they can only blame on their desperation.
As was mentioned in the preceding page, with the Present COE System, the Rich can afford to submit prices at the very highest - just to guarantee themselves a place.
However, it is the "Not-so-Rich" and the "Poor", who will lose out, as their bid prices may not be sufficiently high to win them a place at the top of the pile.
Ironically, the prices submitted by the "Not-so-Rich" and the "Poor" will be used as the ACCEPTED COE Bid Price.Here is a fine example of your DESPICABLE manner in debate, by taking what you need to prove YOUR point in a most DISHONEST way of debate by taking my paragraphs out of context.
BORING ! I have acknowledge tat it is a honest mistake, it is just tat u don't accept it. U aren't very good at reading my posts either, isn't tat equally despicable too ? U r worse in the sense tat u still maintain u r right in reading my posts.
Why did you make only a partial quote from my post (print in Blue) and LEFT OUT the critical part (shown in Red) that should have been read as a COMPLETE WHOLE ?
You DELIBERATELY left out the continuing part now repeated in Red :
The average median price will be $6,200.
All the 20 dealers in the 4th Group will get their application for the FIRST Quota Lot of 50 cars at $6,200 per car.
The other dealers in the 3rd and 5th Group, being the nearest to the average median price will be offered this average median price of $6,200.
While those in the 1st, 2nd and 6th groups will be offered the remaining Quota in equal proportions.
Now, does this indicate that only 20 Dealers is successful and ALL the OTHER Dealers get NOTHING ?
Why do you try so hard to discredit the SUPPLY SIDE Quota System, when all it does is to IMPROVE on the Present COE - (as said by you to be a CHEAPER COE) - by allowing a LOWER 4-digit valuation as a Base Price for bidding to begin ?
Is it worth any of my effort to reply to the other WILD SPECULATIVE and BASELESS ASSUMPTIONS that you have made ?For your information, even when you order a car, you will have to wait at least a minimum of three to four days.to have several issues resolved. Without any complications, the earliest that a Buyer can take over possession of his car, will be at least three days.
3 days better than 3 weeks isn't it ?
I do not want to cut off your long reply about your METHOD.
I already demostrated the problems earlier. Try to fiddle with them before your declaration -
Your views concerning the possibility of prices being high in a SUPPLY SIDE Quota can happen, and there is nothing to prevent the slow creep upwards.Originally posted by nismoS132:i think that, even in a supply side quota, the prices will still be as high.
the problem with such auction style balloting, is that there wil always be people with too much money to spend, and those are the ones that will keep the prices high.
even if like you said, that the dealer has to pay upfront the price of the COE 1st, there are 2 ways to circumvent this, the easier of which would simply be to 1st sell the car together with an estimated bid price. where refunds would be made if there was any left over from the bidding.
the other would be to get a bank loan, which wouldn't be too hard too, as they can use their stock of cars as collateral. the banks would also be rather willing to offer such loans, as they're short term based, even at 15% per month, they would still be earning quite a sum, considering that it'll be a constant flow of income every month.
However, at least it is known the bid prices of the DEALERS selling 31 different makes of cars in Singapore - ( taken from LTA Website: http://www.lta.gov.sg/motoring_matters/index_motoring_vo.htm ) .
Buyers can always show displeasures by not taking up cars with excessively high Quota Bid Prices, as some had shown towards Dealers holding high priced COE for their stocks of cars.
There is nothing stopping Dealers from taking out loans from the Banks to "finance" the values of the Quota Bids.
I am not too certain if the Banks are willing to finance the full OPEN MARKET VALUE of the vehicles in stock.
From past experiences when dealing with Banks, they will at best extend a loan up to a value of 60% of the stock values, so as to give themselves some buffer in the event of problems developing. -
The Quota Bid Price will be declared, similar to the present display of the values shown in the vehicle log card for COE, PARF, and OMV.Originally posted by |-|05|:Try passing on?The dealer doesnt have to try he can.Why?The buyer doesnt have a choice since the certs can only be applied for by the car dealer.Meaning if he doesnt pay he will NEVER get the car.Unlike the COE where by if the dealer doesnt want to bid for him the buyer can bid himself!!And also whatever Nismo that no matter how low the intial bid is those who want the car and have cash to spare WILL bid higher and drive the price up.Like the COE was started pretty low....i remember my dad paying no more then $10k when it 1st started out(i think it might be $5k)
There is nothing stopping any Dealer from bidding higher for his entitlement in a SUPPLY SIDE Quota scheme, but he will probably end up with higher Quota Values for this lot of cars, as compared to what may happen in the follow-up Quota biddings in the subsequent months.
In the Present COE bidding scheme, the Dealers get away from being totally burnt if he bid too high for a COE, as his immediate cash outlay during the bidding is only $100.
In teh Proposed SUPPLY SIDE Quota Scheme, the Dealer will have to pay for the FULL VALUE of his Bid Price.
Consumers have the option of either waiting for the next Quota Bid Price to fall, or have the option of buying a car from a Dealer who can offer a more competitive Quota Bid Price.
With the Proposed SUPPLY SIDE Quota Scheme, the overall objective is bring down the cost of vehicle ownership besides meeting the Government Objective of a controlled growth in the vehicle population. -
Ahh i'm finally begining to see what you mean.Originally posted by Atobe:The Quota Bid Price will be declared, similar to the present display of the values shown in the vehicle log card for COE, PARF, and OMV.
There is nothing stopping any Dealer from bidding higher for his entitlement in a SUPPLY SIDE Quota scheme, but he will probably end up with higher Quota Values for this lot of cars, as compared to what may happen in the follow-up Quota biddings in the subsequent months.
In the Present COE bidding scheme, the Dealers get away from being totally burnt if he bid too high for a COE, as his immediate cash outlay during the bidding is only $100.
In teh Proposed SUPPLY SIDE Quota Scheme, the Dealer will have to pay for the FULL VALUE of his Bid Price.
Consumers have the option of either waiting for the next Quota Bid Price to fall, or have the option of buying a car from a Dealer who can offer a more competitive Quota Bid Price.
With the Proposed SUPPLY SIDE Quota Scheme, the overall objective is bring down the cost of vehicle ownership besides meeting the Government Objective of a controlled growth in the vehicle population.
However it still stands that the dealer can make sure you have bought the car already before bidding for it.He can make you sign the deal paying full price for the car while having a range of prices that you'd give him permission to bid for say +$2000 frm the benchmark bid.The benchmark would be say the lowest bid last month.So you'd have people telling the dealer to bid frm the lowest bid that was accepted last month.And because of that the so called "base" price will keep going up till you get more or less the highest that an average person can afford.Then the so called minium bid set by the goverment wont matter anymore.The dealers do not get burnt because the money is now paid fully by the customer instead of the dealer having to pay 1st.
So the only thing that you end up doing is to make the goverment prove the COE is not just for $$ and people end up waiting longer to get their cars. -
Tat is interesting,
1. If using the median method, Dealer has to depend on LUCK to see if he manage to get the number of cars they need. After they got the cars, they had to use luck again to distribute the cars to the many buyers they had.
Why don't we cut down the steps by letting the Gov sell the COE to the BUYERS direct, through your MEDIAN method ?
Tat will be fair to the Dealer isn't it ? They can sell the number of cars by their market share and they do not have the stress of raising funds to buy the COEs. Why don't we just let the dealer just do the things they r best, tat is selling cars and not do anything else ?
2. Why not use the ballot box method as shown at my reply during much much earlier ? The concept is below,
Gov will use luck to determine who get to have the COE. The buyers themselves will use their IC number to purchase an application number. For each application number he applied, he had to pay a small token sum, for example $100 per application, depending on the mood of the market. The buyers can increase their luck by buying as many numbers they want, however they have to pay for each application number they purchase.
Then on the bidding day, the computer will generate randomly out the numbers tat had won the bid. If Gov decide to release 5000 bids, then the comp will generate out the 5000 numbers from the people tat had applied tis month. Those 5000 applicants with the numbers that were generated can thus proceed to collect their COEs. If an applicant applied for 5 application numbers and he got 2 of them inside the list, the computer will just generate another number out to replace the repeated applicant.
After so he can go directly to a dealer to buy the car. Take note tat the person who won the bid must buy a car within tat month.
Those desperate or unlucky, who must get a car within tis month can proceed with another method. They get to go through the old COE method again. There is a fix lower price of, lets say $10000 and they will bid against others who want to bid by the second method. Note tat Gov will at most fix 30% of tis month quotas, tat is 1500 for this type of bidders. If there are lesser of bidders for tis second type then they just get to pay $10000. If there r more than bidders than this fixed amount, then the price will just rise like the old COE.
Why not state the advantages your idea have compared to the one above ? Wat problems do u see will arises ?? -
Tat is interesting,
1. If using the median method, Dealer has to depend on LUCK to see if he manage to get the number of cars they need. After they got the cars, they had to use luck again to distribute the cars to the many buyers they had.
Why don't we cut down the steps by letting the Gov sell the COE to the BUYERS direct, through your MEDIAN method ?
Tat will be fair to the Dealer isn't it ? They can sell the number of cars by their market share and they do not have the stress of raising funds to buy the COEs. Why don't we just let the dealer just do the things they r best, tat is selling cars and not do anything else ?
2. Why not use the ballot box method as shown at my reply during much much earlier ? The concept is below,
Gov will use luck to determine who get to have the COE. The buyers themselves will use their IC number to purchase an application number. For each application number he applied, he had to pay a small token sum, for example $100 per application, depending on the mood of the market. The buyers can increase their luck by buying as many numbers they want, however they have to pay for each application number they purchase.
Then on the bidding day, the computer will generate randomly out the numbers tat had won the bid. If Gov decide to release 5000 bids, then the comp will generate out the 5000 numbers from the people tat had applied tis month. Those 5000 applicants with the numbers that were generated can thus proceed to collect their COEs. If an applicant applied for 5 application numbers and he got 2 of them inside the list, the computer will just generate another number out to replace the repeated applicant.
After so he can go directly to a dealer to buy the car. Take note tat the person who won the bid must buy a car within tat month.
Those desperate or unlucky, who must get a car within tis month can proceed with another method. They get to go through the old COE method again. There is a fix lower price of, lets say $10000 and they will bid against others who want to bid by the second method. Note tat Gov will at most fix 30% of tis month quotas, tat is 1500 for this type of bidders. If there are lesser of bidders for tis second type then they just get to pay $10000. If there r more than bidders than this fixed amount, then the price will just rise like the old COE.
Why not state the advantages your idea have compared to the one above ? Wat problems do u see will arises ?? -
There are indeed many loopholes for the Dealer to circumvent a SUPPLY SIDE Quota Scheme, as much as there were loopholes when the Present COE Scheme was first introduced.Originally posted by |-|05|:Ahh i'm finally begining to see what you mean.
However it still stands that the dealer can make sure you have bought the car already before bidding for it.He can make you sign the deal paying full price for the car while having a range of prices that you'd give him permission to bid for say +$2000 frm the benchmark bid.The benchmark would be say the lowest bid last month.So you'd have people telling the dealer to bid frm the lowest bid that was accepted last month.And because of that the so called "base" price will keep going up till you get more or less the highest that an average person can afford.Then the so called minium bid set by the goverment wont matter anymore.The dealers do not get burnt because the money is now paid fully by the customer instead of the dealer having to pay 1st.
So the only thing that you end up doing is to make the goverment prove the COE is not just for $$ and people end up waiting longer to get their cars.
With the COE already in place for more then 5 years (?), with legislation passed by the Government, it has been fine tuned to the advantage of the Government - to the extent that genuine Buyers' bids of $1 to $999 (and up to 4 figure values of $9999) do not get a chance to succeed.
With the strong arm of the Government, rules and regulations can again be applied to ensure that Dealers do not cheat Buyers into ADVANCE SELLING of their stocks BEFORE they have received any approved Quota Lot to sell.
The Dealers can receive only bookings allowed, but not completing the sale that include finance and insurance commitment.
Legislations can be passed, or Buyers can be educated that it is in their interest to ensure that the Quota Premium is known (or indicated in the Vehicle Log card, alongside the OMV, PARF Values) before they commit to a sale.
There seems to be too much speculation that Buyers and Dealers will behave irrationally and in desperation to buy and sell vehicles.
With the full strength of Legislations to prevent abuse of the scheme by either side, it will act as a restrainer to impulsive acts.
It is time to bring some sanity to the prices of vehicles, and help make the first step to bring down a major factor that affects the Cost of Living in Singapore. -
Since your position has changed somewhat, it will not be appropriate for my reply to your recent long post before this, and I will let those issues rest.
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Thank you, sincerely, for your creative sugestion in having the MEDIAN Method (from a SUPPLY SIDE Quota Scheme) to be used in the Present COE Scheme.
Tat is interesting,
1. If using the median method, Dealer has to depend on LUCK to see if he manage to get the number of cars they need. After they got the cars, they had to use luck again to distribute the cars to the many buyers they had.
Why don't we cut down the steps by letting the Gov sell the COE to the BUYERS direct, through your MEDIAN method ?
Tat will be fair to the Dealer isn't it ? They can sell the number of cars by their market share and they do not have the stress of raising funds to buy the COEs. Why don't we just let the dealer just do the things they r best, tat is selling cars and not do anything else ?
I am not certain here, but feel that there is little difference in the nett effect, since some irrational individual bidders (both Buyers and Dealers) have only their own interest at stake.
If the Dealers are made responsible for the Bid Price to the Quota Lot size that they bid, the financial impact will be considerably higher; and the possibilities of stock costs being incrementally higher are always present, as the stocks remain unsold over time.Continuating post by stupidissmart:
There is hardly any problem if the "ballot system" is used by the Government to determine which lucky bidder (Buyer or Dealer) will get the COE; or if the "ballot system" is used by the Dealer to determine which Buyer in the long waiting list will be lucky to get the opportunity to buy the car.
2. Why not use the ballot box method as shown at my reply during much much earlier ? The concept is below,
Gov will use luck to determine who get to have the COE. The buyers themselves will use their IC number to purchase an application number. For each application number he applied, he had to pay a small token sum, for example $100 per application, depending on the mood of the market. The buyers can increase their luck by buying as many numbers they want, however they have to pay for each application number they purchase.
Then on the bidding day, the computer will generate randomly out the numbers tat had won the bid. If Gov decide to release 5000 bids, then the comp will generate out the 5000 numbers from the people tat had applied tis month. Those 5000 applicants with the numbers that were generated can thus proceed to collect their COEs. If an applicant applied for 5 application numbers and he got 2 of them inside the list, the computer will just generate another number out to replace the repeated applicant.
After so he can go directly to a dealer to buy the car. Take note tat the person who won the bid must buy a car within tat month.
Those desperate or unlucky, who must get a car within tis month can proceed with another method. They get to go through the old COE method again. There is a fix lower price of, lets say $10000 and they will bid against others who want to bid by the second method. Note tat Gov will at most fix 30% of tis month quotas, tat is 1500 for this type of bidders. If there are lesser of bidders for tis second type then they just get to pay $10000. If there r more than bidders than this fixed amount, then the price will just rise like the old COE.
Why not state the advantages your idea have compared to the one above ? Wat problems do u see will arises ??
Although, I am quite certain that there will be grumbling - but that is Life in Singapore.
The other option, as was proposed, is that the Dealers can accept advance bookings from interested Buyers, with or without commitment fees.
With this middle ground being found, I hope that this interesting exchanges have found a satisfying place to rest.
My apologies for the harsh terms used during the exchanges, but you seem to have a knack of pushing your views that are disjointed from logic, and made worse by your reply being at a tangent to the issues. It must be quite an effort to do so, which seems to be part of your inclination to be different and controversial - as in your choice of a "nick" . Then again, it is your preferred "cup of tea", which unfortunately has a tendency to spill your contents onto others. -
Just for info sake, I have already stated tis idea since 11 October 2003 · 11:35 AM... while we r still on the 2nd page of all tis discussion...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.
Now I am only just glad it is over. Things had gotten a bit busy lately for me and I already wanna cut short my time spent in here.
If the others r still interested please carry on. To ilovemilk sorry to have hijack your thread.
PS : I wonder in history wat will they call tis long long discussion list as...
1) 2 Writers, 2 weeks, 5 pages,100+ Postings Discussion,
2) Stupidissmart Stupid Nick & Reverse World or
3) Nightmare of A-B -
[/b]Although you may claim that "balloting is balloting", the difference between your post on Page 5-25 October 2003 - 01:05A.M. and that which you have posted on Page 2-11 October 2003-11:53A.M. is that the Balloting suggested on Page 2 was used as a total replacement for the existing COE scheme - correct me if I am wrong.Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Just for info sake, I have already stated tis idea since 11 October 2003 · 11:35 AM... while we r still on the 2nd page of all tis discussion...[b]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.
In response to your question - how does the Government determine when there are more Dealers in a Median Group then there are Quota Lots available - I had also suggested that a "Lucky Draw" could be possible, which I believe you had objected as to why create another step in the process ?
This clarification is not to re-ignite the debate, but the difference in suggesting the balloting approach is quite different between your post on Page 2 and Page 5 - unless I have read more in your Page 5 then what was posted ?continuation of post by stupidissmart:
It was an opportunity to bring our exchange to a proper close, as I will seem rude if I do not reply to any of your postings over the next 5 weeks or so.
Now I am only just glad it is over. Things had gotten a bit busy lately for me and I already wanna cut short my time spent in here.
If the others r still interested please carry on. To ilovemilk sorry to have hijack your thread.continuation of post by stupidissmart:
Does it really matter if this goes on for another week, but it was certainly interesting to see that this thread has scored more then 2400 hits in viewership.
PS : I wonder in history wat will they call tis long [b]long discussion list as...
1) 2 Writers, 2 weeks, 5 pages,100+ Postings Discussion,
2) Stupidissmart Stupid Nick & Reverse World or
3) Nightmare of A-B
[/b]
Co-incidentally, in the Saturday's edition of the Newpaper, there was a controversy of a Woman who overpaid her COE by $27,000 PLUS, and only discovered it when she decide to sell her car.
I wonder what will be your views if I had pushed again that with the SUPPLY SIDE Quota Scheme - making Dealers responsible for the bidding of the quota - and getting rid of all the multi-tiered COE schemes of Closed and Open Categories - then this lady will never get to experience this incident of being cheated.
While you may say that the Buyer was too lazy to educate herself of the COE scheme, one has to understand that not everyone has a full understanding of the way the COE had actually operated.
LTA had claimed that the previous 'closed' system had led to each bidder not knowing what the other had submitted for their bids; while in the present 'open' system, there is supposed to be transparency since all can see the bids being posted "live".
Unfortunately, the 'Open' COE bidding system remains open to manipulation by the Authorities, in the manner that low bids are locked out of the system - (one should try to submit a genuine low bid, and buck the trend towards high priced COE, and one will soon realise that the system just do not accept such GENUINE offers) .
See the post below :- -
From the Newpaper - Saturday edition - 25 October 2003:
http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/top/story/0,4136,39481,00.html?
No-one told me about it
Mazda Motor: It is not up to us to inform buyer of COE prices
By Faith Teo
Picture/ MOHD ISHAK
REMEMBER that unusual price for a certificate of entitlement (COE) two years ago?
Car buyers received a windfall when the Category A COE for cars of 1600cc or below dropped to just $101 in July 2001.
They would have been expecting to pay up to $30,000.
Depending on what car they bought, they would have got a huge refund based on the COE rebates set by car dealers.
For instance, if a dealer had set the COE rebate at $25,000 that month, his customers would each have got back $24,899 ($25,000 less $101).
But there's one person, and likely some others as well, who did not enjoy that windfall.
Instead, Mrs Mary Ng now stands to lose a big amount - all because of that unusual bid.
She had paid $27,048 for her COE, which is for 10 years, when she bought her car from Mazda Motor two years ago.
Today, if she scraps or sells the car, she won't get back 80 per cent of that amount.
Her COE is worth $76 now. This is because she had made her purchase with an open category COE that month.
This category is valid for six months and some car dealers offer it if a customer wants a car in a hurry or can't be bothered to bid for a COE.
But the value of an Open Category COE is based on the COE for a car of that size in the month in which the customer buys the car.
Usually, the difference is small.
But for Mrs Ng, 50, the difference turned out to be nearly $27,000.
She had bought a 1.6-litre Mazda 323 hatchback, and that month's COE for a car of that size was $101.
And that was all her COE would be worth.
She said she didn't even know about this till now as she had just returned to Singapore then, after 11 years in Papua New Guinea on business.
She claimed no-one told her anything about the implications of owning an open or Category E COE.
It was only when she wanted to buy a new car last month and tried to sell the old one that she found out.
The dealer she wanted to buy the new car from informed her that her old car's resale value would be affected because its COE was now virtually worthless.
A furious Mrs Ng went to Mazda Motor to demand an explanation.
She said she bought the Mazda because the price of $86,000 seemed attractive and she had to wait only two weeks for it.
She claimed no-one at Mazda had told her the COE would be an open category one. She felt the company was to blame for the situation.
When asked if she should have taken more responsibility for what happened, she said she had assumed that Mazda would do what was necessary to safeguard her interests.
She said: 'The lady who sold the Mazda car to me told me I had to bid for a COE, but she never said it was going to be an open category one. I told her I had just returned to Singapore after 11 years, but she still didn't explain the implications to me.'
But Mazda Motor says it is not responsible for her predicament. (See report below.)
Mrs Ng claimed the dealer's general manager told her it was not his company's responsibility to educate buyers about COEs.
'Nobody at Mazda apologised, they pushed all the responsibility to LTA (Land Transport Authority). That's what makes me so angry,' added Mrs Ng.
She then approached LTA. In a letter sent to her, LTA explained the workings of the vehicle quota system and informed her there was nothing it could do to help her recover the lost sum.
She claimed she was told that more than 300 car owners were in the same position, but LTA would not confirm this.
LTA told The New Paper that such an extreme situation is unlikely to occur again, with the current open bidding system.
With the previous 'closed' system, buyers submitted bids without knowing what others were bidding.
This led to rare but extreme discrepancies in price such as the July 2001 bid of $101 and a December 1997 bid of $50.
Now, buyers can see how much others are bidding and adjust their bids accordingly.
This transparency has helped to stabilise COE prices.
Mrs Ng's car was bought using an open category COE that Mazda had purchased in June 2001.
Now, it's worth $76 after two years of depreciation.
Now, her only alternative is to keep a car she can't wait to sell.
'Even my car insurance company has told me that if anything major happens to my car now, they will only pay according to the COE value of $76,' she said.
'It's so stressful to drive this car now.'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHAT MAZDA MOTOR SAYS:
MAZDA Motor's marketing manager told The New Paper that it was the responsibility of the Land Transport Authority to inform the public about the different types of COEs.
Declining to be named, he said: 'LTA has the social responsibility to do that, and it has done so in many relevant publications.'
He reiterated the company's stand that there are just too many regulations on the sale of a car to explain everything.
'We try as much as possible to explain things at the point of sale, but there's no standard list of points that we follow.'
He claimed that at the time when Mrs Ng bought the car, she was informed her COE would be an open category one. That was the reason why she got her car in about two weeks.
'It's not like we bought the COE at $101 and charged her $27,048 for it. We bought it at that price too.'
Out of six car dealers The New Paper approached, only two were willing to comment on whether their sales teams are trained to inform buyers of the different COEs.
Borneo Motors, which sells Toyota vehicles, said its staff members tell buyers about the different COEs but declined to elaborate.
Kah Motors, dealer for Honda vehicles, said it had not met an incident like Mrs Ng's so far.
Its marketing manager, Mr Ricky Teo, said he understood 'a high percentage of people don't know about the open category situation'.
He added: 'COE information is open, it's just that a lot of people don't pay enough attention to it.
'LTA should highlight it more clearly. Even on their website, it's not very evident.'
Mr Teo said that as a standard procedure, his staff members explain the different COEs to buyers, and ask them which category they want to bid for.
The buyer's choice is then reflected in a written pre-sales contract.
Mr Andy Lau, sales consultant for used car dealer Car Times Automobile, said the value of Mrs Ng's car would definitely be affected by the COE, although he did not say by how much.
LTA's spokesman confirmed there wasn't anything they could do for Mrs Ng as COE values are the result of a transparent system determined by market forces.
She added that out of the 1,340 people holding the July 2001 open category COE, only those owning cars with an engine capacity of 1600cc or below would be severely affected.
That was the category in which the $101 bid was made.
Information on COEs can be found on LTA's website at www.onemotoring.com.sg.