The Straits Times on Saturday published a 7-page special report discussing the recent property boom in Singapore. The property correspondent for ST deliberated on this phenomenon and discussed if the rebound in prices was indeed sustainable or that a property bubble was developing in Singapore. Many expert opinions were sought in the report but it seems to me that the opinions offered were often vague and unconvincing guesses about the trend of the property market that did not hold much water. I think the possibility of a bubble is much higher than that of real fundamental demand for property. Let me explain.
With the exception of Singapore and probably China, nowhere else in the world can one find such irrational exuberance. According to reports from the US Federal Reserve, European Union Central Bank and almost all governments around the world, the greatest economic recession since the Great Depression of the 1920s has only stopped getting more severe. Recovery is beginning and the economic wounds caused by the ravages of the financial tsunami are starting to heal. But that's the point. The economy is starting to heal, it is not fit and healthy, ready to go out there to jump in the air and perform somersaults. Singaporeans and Chinese do not seem to differentiate between "an economy that stopped getting worse" and a "booming economy". In China, most retail investors are not sophisticated ones. Speculation is rife and most retail investors in the markets punt their money on assets that they hardly understand. There is a saying in China, " 新股不败 ", which means that you cannot lose money by chasing after IPOs in China, even if the company is selling fresh air. Farmers sold their cattle and lands to punt in the stock market. Factory workers sold their bicycles to buy stocks of companies they had never heard of. For every rags-to-riches story the markets in China made, there are 3 or more tragedies that nobody heard. Since the stock market peak 1 month ago, the Shanghai Composite Index tanked more than 20%. For the Singaporeans that bought property which is easily 15-20 times the average annual income of a typical Singaporean, is what they are doing so different from the Chinese farmers and factory workers? I think not. The main difference is that Singaporeans are gambling with they think they will have but the farmer gambled with what he has got.
The economic backdrop to this property boom is significant. While there is general consensus that the economy will only get better from henceforth, the property market in Singapore had already priced in an economic future resembling the boom times of 2006-2007 or even the property bubble period of 1996-1997. This is a ludicrous assumption as the world economy had been fundamentally reshaped by this global financial crisis. Business costs and profitability, job security and remuneration are all going to be different in the new world economic order. Any property bought between 1996 & 1997 is still underwater, even after the ramp up in property prices over the last few months. Therefore to speculate in property that is priced on the assumption of a mean-reverting global economy is both naïve and dangerous. With the property boom that is hopelessly out of sync with the economic reality, there exists a real risk that property investors in Singapore may end up paying for overpriced white elephants for the rest of the lives.
The government should also be very concerned about this phenomenon as the investor base swarming into the current property boom are not high-end property investors but rather mass market participants that have lost their heads in the mad rush for "bargains". While the rich are more able to withstand valuation losses (thus margin calls on their property loans), ordinary folks may not be able to do so. If my predictions of a correction in the property market realizes, such investors may end up force-selling their expensive purchases at significant losses which would certainly derail the financial ambitions of these ordinary Singaporeans. Government subsidies for new babies and benefits like extended maternity leave seems laughable when newly-married couples are forced to delay their plans for a family due to financial ruin resulted from the purchase of their new properties. With sky-rocketing mortgage payments consuming a majority of the monthly salary, support for parents will become a greater issue and the whole "father suing son for neglect" problem comes into focus. The spillover effects from the private property market to the public one (ie. HDB) is becoming increasingly disruptive. Since there is currently no effective mechanism to segregate the public property market from the private one, the ramp-up in condo prices forces couples buying their first HDB to pay over the odds for a place to start building their family. Even a university graduate would struggle to pay for a 4-room HDB flat in today's prices without depleting their CPF holdings and monthly salary. Coupled with the government's move to import more and more foreign workers, in part feeding the rental market in Singapore (thereby further incentivizing the purchase of property to rent rather than to stay), the growing discontent by the burgeoning middle class can be easily understood. The various issues that plague the government today are all inter-connection ones. The root of one problem is often the consequence of another. The government needs to realize that there is a real multi-faceted social consequence to this mad rush for private property in Singapore's suburbs.
One of Singapore's property honcho told the ST that he does not think a bubble is developing. His arguments include 1) pent-up demand for private property from 2007/8 due to lack of supply by developers, 2) relatively cheaper property when compared to 1996, 3) low interest rates due to market conditions. I think none of these reasons make sense and cannot justify the current property boom. A bubble can be rightly defined as a spike in prices from pure expectations of future prices which is not dependant on any fundamental principles. As explained above, the fundamental economic reasons for purchasing property at such high prices is clearly non-existent. Investors are willing to pay such exorbitant prices simply because they are expecting others to follow suit. Stories of property agents snapping up 3 or 4 condominiums before the official launch only to flip them over to retails buyers are resurfacing. These people are not interested in investing in the properties. They do not care about factors like location or rent yield. All they care about is reselling the condos for a quick buck. As long as they can cover the loan interests for that short time between the flip and some cash to spare, who cares if they are helping to create the illusion of robust demand and hiking up the prices artificially?
Buyers were not buying in 2007-8 because they could not afford to, not because there were no private properties to buy. Job insecurity and asset depreciation were rife for the last 2 years and people were reluctant to commit to big financial outlays. The property developments were rescinded by the developers due to the lack of demand then. The developers were hoping to make a bigger profit when they re-release the developments into the market when demand came back. The supply was always there, just not the demand. To suggest otherwise would be hypocritical and inaccurate. Also, to compare the price levels now to that of 1996 is simply ridiculous. It was a bubble then. In fact, it was the biggest property bubble to date in Singapore. People were paying up till 25-times their annual salary to own a condominium. Just because it is not bigger than that of the 1996 bubble does not mean we are not in one now. The current boom is a bubble and it is fast becoming bigger than that in 1996.
Thirdly, the low prevailing interest rates was cited as a reason for the spending binge in the property market. There is some truth in this reasoning but that truth is not of the logical variety. Rather the reasoning is a rather frivolous, nevertheless accurate, one. You see, many Singaporean investors have short memories and consider things only in the immediate vicinity or timeframe. Although the short term interest rates for SIBOR are rather low for now, housing mortgages are tied to the floating SIBOR for the next 20-30 years. With the US Treasury's policy of quantitative easing, the huge stimulus will inevitably cause US interest rates to rocket to calm inflationary worries. With Singapore's financial markets open and accessible to investors worldwide and MAS's policy of pegging SGD to USD, the SIBOR will correspondingly rise in line with the US. Therefore if not for the shortsightedness of the average Singaporean property investor, the low interest rates they are paying now cannot and should not be a justification for putting money n an investment vehicle which will take 20-30 years to repay.
One of the cornerstones of the Singapore dream is to own a property of your own. The purpose of the government to institute the HDB was also to facilitate the building of quality, affordable housing to the people of Singapore. I was brought up to believe that everything in Singapore is possible as long as I am merit it. I do not think that anymore. Wealth is becoming the greatest social divide, one that cannot be bridged by industry or intelligence. If one is not rich enough in the beginning, it will be doubly hard for him to participate in the tremendous wealth of our nation. I grew up thinking that Singapore, despite its occasional inadequacies, was an ideal place to buy a home and set up a family. Instead, this dream of property ownership and family building increasingly feels more like a chain that traps one here on this tiny island, forcing one to serve out a mammoth financial obligation for the rest of his life with no respite. A property should first be a home before an investment. Unlike stocks, there is often a real human story behind a house or a piece of land. It means much more than just money and I hope people can see that earlier before the house of cards start falling down, bursting the bubble encapsulating it.
Good write, but nevertheless erroneous and debatable. Would you like the ratress insights?
ReplyDeleteHey Ratress, please provide your insights :)
ReplyDeletePirate vs Ratress
ReplyDeleteA special relationship between the Ratress and the Pirate irrelevantly creates the tendency for the Ratress to take opposing views to the Pirates. While the Pirate thinks that the possibility of an asset bubble is higher than real demand for property, the Ratress thinks that current asset prices are partly driven by the under supply of housing and the low interest rate environment. By suggesting the presence of a asset bubble means that prices deviates from its intrinsic value. As it is difficult to determine the intrinsic value in the market place and the presence of a bubble can only be determined retrospectively, may the Ratress suggest that we take a bet that housing prices would not be less than the 18% YTD rise in mid FY10 as her bid to show conviction to the argument,.
While it is true that the stock market volatility and the economic backdrop do not suggest that there is sunshine after the rain, the glow behind the clouds is enough for people with vested interest to buy a property. Consider that approximately 100k people call Singapore home every year, 5k HDB flats are built every year, and the 30k private housing inventory in the market. Hosing-starts occurs everyday when new families are formed and migrants settling into the country. The low interest rates make purchasing attractive relative to renting. Consider a hundred thousand new immigrants amidst four million residents every year and supply that housing supply takes time to flow to the market.
Perhaps it is time we recognize the disparity between demand and supply, perhaps it is time that the HDB / URA work more closing with the Immigration and Checkpoint Authority in planning for housing development. Perhaps it is time to re-evaluate if we have erred on the front of demographic policies. (Or perhaps inflated asset prices are a way to boost Singaporean’s wealth; to be asset rich and spur consumption and happiness?)
The Ratress reiterates that by no means does she believe that housing is cheap in Singapore The high mortgage debt to GDP ratio and the high mortgage payment to monthly income ratio inadvertently show that many Singaporeans are saddled with large financing burden. But to say that the current property price is an asset bubble is an overstatement.
*This might be of interest to the pirate that average house price to disposable income is 10.4x in Australia and with 200,000 immigrants against a population of 22million.
Hi Ratress, you used the term "housing starts" wrongly...housing starts refers to the act of starting to construct a house...
ReplyDeleteI guess it is a fair point, to say that one cannot say it is a bubble just because Singaporeans are becoming unable to afford the properties comfortably, because we can draw example from China for example...where most of their indigeneous people have been priced out of their property markets by speculators, capitalists, international investors and the likes...but it is sad that Singapore has become just that, a place like China where the social costs of her citizens are not looked after anymore.
ReplyDeleteYour stats on Australia cannot be used as a fair reference because it is based on their disposable income. What is a Singaporean's disposable income? A Singaporean does not have the social safety net like that of an Australian, so we need to put aside even more money for that rainy day when we lose our jobs while the mortgage and the kids and the parents do not cease to exist or pause their needs while you go about looking for a job. The government has lost its connect with reality as to what is "affordable", and in so doing, has led our younger citizens to believe that they can "afford" a 30yr mortgage that is 30% of their income....
Every bubble that burst have a story to tell. Recap the dom com burst, the Asian financial crisis and all that. This one in Singapore is clearly one in the advance making, it is being liquidty driven,IRs hypes, irresponsible reporting in the only powerful media ST in Singapore and greatly influenced by personal agena of the writers and developers or powerful property businessmen. There are underlying reasons why the government did not react except paying lip service and the U turn on capital gain tax feedback. Meanwhile, it is inevitable the bubble is getting bigger and scary, sucked in by greed, fear, kiasu and naive Singaporeans.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, GREED has started to creep in deeply and uncontrollably in our once clean, quiet and innocent society. GREED has now instilled deeply into our citizens and even those who make major decisions would become slanted to their own benefits. Singapore very soon when the IRs are opened, will be transformed to be a GAMBLING HUB of the world as the two IRs are the two world largest investments. Am sad and sorry to see the decay and social morale are crackling quickly where people will become more GREEDY, self centred, wants SPEED, you die or i die attitude and hypocrisy are just normal. The decay will accelerate feed by GREED, MONIES and MORE MONIES. CHASING AND CHASING AND GATHERING ALL THE GOLD AND PURSUING MATERIAL BENEFITS. GAMBLE, SPECULATE IN SHARES AND PROPERTY AND PERSONAL GRATIFICATIONS AND PLEASURES ALL OVER. It is too much to give up and sorry, one has to pay the price. What price? You should have the answer.
ReplyDeleteAustralian stats by no means serve as a comparison. They are merely provided for the personal interest of the pirate.
ReplyDeleteGlad that this post had invoked some discussion about this issue and that was really the point anyway. I would like to offer my opinion on the comments made. Ratress thought that calling the current property boom a bubble was too much of an exaggerated claim. I beg to defer. I agree that the high prices of Singapore's properties is driven partly by the lack of supply in the face of escalating demand. However I think the process of free market price determination has raced way ahead of fundamental economics. I am suggesting that demand, particularly in the mid-tier private property market which new PRs do not really participate in, has risen to an unrealistic level when speculators try to front-run the true homeowners. Any expected increase in real housing or rental demand has been priced in and more. I am predicting that the rise in demand to be unsustainable and consequently drop by the end of next year. Also, the relative lack of supply is also a temporary and uncertain one. With growing calls for the Government to build new HDBs to cater to the masses of newly imported PRs, there is a real possibility that a glut of public housing could be introduced into the market by HDB and the spillover effects from the public housing market to the private will inevitably dent the demand and expected rental yields from property assets which in turn brings the demand down further. There are real and significant risks of demand plummeting (due the reasons quoted) while the upside drivers remained largely only speculative ones. Therefore I still believe that a bubble is more probable than not.
ReplyDeleteThe suggestion of having more collaboration between government agencies is a great one though. Cheers.
I do think this article has failed to address a very key point.And i am slightly biased to agree with ratress view.
ReplyDeleteDemand and supply plays to its natural economics only in a free market. close to 80% of our housing are HDB(in 2006) although this % might be different now.
There are recent new govt policies in place that do not allow negative equity sale of flats. The infamous market subsidy policy, is in fact a bigger scam and long armed tyrant than we think. The rules put in place to lock the asset value at artificial values are aplenty.
HDB price their new flats upwards by up to 14% each quarter claiming a rise in value around the area, a quick check to HDB resale statistics will show that it is untrue. Hence instead of what they claim to be surrounding value of existing flats going up leading to a price increase, it is in fact the opposite, where surrounding houses peg their values to government ever rising valuations. It is also natural that supply will always outstrip demand now, given that all buildings will go ahead only after BTO. Take a moment now to pause, and see how it builds, on how this action feeds on the normal human mind.
DBSS flats are also notoriously expensive and have been selectively deployed only in mature estates. This flash effect itself,sustains and re ascertains the artificial price floor.
What worries me, to digress a little, is if this is truly a bubble, how does it reverse itself.
Negative equity sale - Banned.
Prices - constanly up
Loans - to Banks and it makes it more complicating that they are now also offered by foreign banks.
Hence say i were the new housing minister, for me to come in and declare that i will lower housing cost, will kill many couples that were either silly enough to commit now, or couples who happen to be of age to start families and purchase a property now. So what happens? Giving bigger discounts or grants,would seem to be the mid term solution,to let inflation and pay catch up with housing prices. But this itself re-invents the cycle, it holds up prices artificially, and demand will grow to an unhealthy pend up.
Hence both contibutors, rat and pirate, have failed to address this point, on how this bubble is artificially held, and how it is so,because of our demographics, and government tyranny policies.
HDB arrears are not even mentioned yet.
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.singapore/browse_thread/thread/8c4235d24c2c84a4/e78014720172f88b?lnk=raot
Don't forget who acquires it compulsorily
looking forward to a feedback
http://singaporeenquirer.sg/?p=370
ReplyDeletehe does say most of the gist
Hi Ash, I think that the fundamental difference between our opinions lie in the definition of a "bubble". Perhaps there is some truth to what you are suggesting about the current property boom. With the government ensuring a price floor to the property prices through the mechanisms you have mentioned in your comment, it is entirely possible that no significant price correction may happen and prices remain sky-high for a forseeable future. Simply put, no crash, no bubble.
ReplyDeleteHowever I think of a "bubble" in a slightly different way. While it may be true that the government prevents a collapse of the public property market and to a lesser degree, also the private one, it is not true that the government guarantees against any and all losses or to use your words, negative equity. This is a fact since I know of people that have bought flats during the boom of 1996 which are still underwater now, 13 years later. Add 13 years of interest payments, on top of a 10-20% decline in equity value, is it still fair to say that no significant losses had been incurred and that the "bubble never burst"? The private property market, where the current boom is happening, which enjoys less protection from the government is in an even more precarious situation than the public one.
Moreover, I think property is special amongst all asset classes as lots of people invest in property not to speculate or make a profit but to build a home and a family. When young couples struggle to cope with the escalating mortgages and find it increasingly difficult afford property in Singapore, isn't the local property market getting out of sync with the real society? I feel the primary function of the property market is to provide homes for Singaporeans. Everything else should be secondary. If the market stops serving its primary function but instead has ballooned to a level which caters to speculators and rich investors, isn't it unrealistic and unsustainable, like a bubble?
Anyway, this is my 2 cents worth. Thanks for the comment though.
I am renting a condo apartment now that is worth $900k at $2900p/m.
ReplyDeleteThat works out to be a 3.9% returns.
If I were to buy this unit and service a $720k loan with interest rate of 2.5%.
interest works out to be $1500P/M
Conservancy of $300P/M
Tax and misc est : $200P/M
Works out to be $2k per month
My $180k (could have be Down payment) investment in shares has been giving me a monthly returns of $5k averagely.
By renting, I am actually have positive of $4100 ($2000cost of owning unit - $2900 rental +$5000roi on DP invested)
With current Property climate where there is potential more downside than upside, why are everyone buying??
Please correct me if I am wrong
Property became a tool to get rich and thus have been escalating prices to unaffordable level for young couples, with this more couples will have to get married only when they can afford to own a home.
ReplyDeleteI think this will be a problem for Singapore, population will not increase as what the government might have wished for.
Plus the aging population, will there be increasing demand for homes?
Expats are leaving Singapore in large numbers due to the downturn and with the forcasted gradual and slow recovery of the economy will foreigners drive up demand in the near future?
Recent reports analysed that the IR in Singapore will not be sustainable or profitable as large number of visitors is needed to sustain these 2 IR. Plus the fact that Many 'Big time gamblers' have many better choices of places to gamble with less restriction. I also find the IR theme to be somehow out of place, How many gamblers do you expect will bring their family along?? Or do you expect to see them on roller coaster Rides??
I think Casinos in Macau or other countries normally have night clubs or other 'Entertainment' to complement their casino thus attracting many gambler to visit them regularly. So if Ir is a flop will Property prices fall?
Is the current Property Boom Sustainable??