《联合早报》Dec 05, 2007
新加坡城市发展（CDL）、迪拜政府旗下投资公司Istithmar及美国的Elad集团组成的财团，将斥资25亿元，发展美芝路大型综合商业地段。这25亿元中将包括近16亿8889万的标价（即地皮价格）。这三方将各支付三份之一的成本。
城市发展执行主席郭令明和其财团伙伴昨天在记者会上透露以上消息。这个财团是在两个月前，成功标得这幅位于拥有120年历史的莱佛士酒店和新达新加坡之间的地段。
这也是来自中东和美国的主要国际投资者，第一次与本地发展商携手合作，在官地上发展大型的项目。
担任嘉宾的国家发展部政务部长傅海燕在致辞时也提到，到目前为止，今年来自海外的房地产投资额估计达到88亿元，比去年全年的约53亿元，增加66％。在2005年，这个投资额约为41亿元，2004年则只有8亿元。
傅海燕认为来自海外的房地产投资额大幅增加，显示投资者对本地的经济展望和发展潜能，持有乐观的看法。
傅海燕昨天早上也见证了称为“South Beach”的建筑协议书签署仪式。项目估计会在明年动工，并在2012年竣工。由于和建筑商关系良好，城市发展不认为寻找承包商和建筑材料会有太大问题。
城市发展指出，这个项目将包括两栋最高达45层的新建筑，以及四栋受保留建筑。计划包括建造豪华私人住宅、两间豪华酒店（一间拥有约450间客房的五星级酒店，和一间拥有约250间客房，比较小的豪华精品酒店）、办公楼和购物商场。
财团表示，正寻找酒店伙伴并打算引进“品牌”私人住宅，就好比瑞吉居(St Regis Residences)和纽约的The Plaza品牌，而Elad集团是北美最大的私营房地产公司，集团的一些项目就包括纽约的Plaza Hotel。郭令明说，在本地引进这个品牌当然是其中一个选择。
Elad集团兼主席纳夫塔里（Miki Naftali）说：“我们在全世界制造限量版的Plaza品牌。”他表示集团正同东京、上海和香港的伙伴洽谈，在这些地方建造以Plaza为品牌的私宅。郭令明说，三方都将各自的强项、文化和经验，带入这个发展项目中，以便建造一个独一无二的项目。
美芝路的地段占地3.5公顷，总楼面可达15万平方公尺左右（161万平方英尺）。发展商必须把总楼面的至少40％发展为办公楼，另外至少30％建成酒店，其余楼面则可作辅助用途，如商店、餐馆、娱乐场所等等。地契租约为99年。
发展商就必需保留现有地段上的前武装部队仕官俱乐部(NCO Club)及旧兵营共四座建筑物。但发展商允许在这些保留建筑周围，建造新的高建筑物，让新、旧建筑互相辉映，也为市区地段制造新的景观。
傅海燕过后接受媒体访问时也指出，这个项目需要的考量的地方很多，市建局也设定了一些条件需要发展商遵守，其中有效保留旧建筑是一个非常重要的考量点。
她说：“由于我们对旧兵营有很多记忆，我们还需要确保地段上的设计不会掩盖这些保留建筑的风采。”
胜出的设计就采纳了“绿色建筑”和环保设计，一个大型的“环境过滤顶篷”覆盖了户外空间，也衔接了新、旧建筑。这个顶篷结构能遮阳挡雨，也能同时让顶篷下的建筑自然通风。财团提呈的这个“绿色环保”设计，让当局非常欣赏。
郭令明指出，这个地段拥有悠久的历史，因此，为这个地区注入新活力是很重要的。他说，城市发展董事经理郭令裕在过去十多年来，一直致力于推动城市发展成为“绿色”发展商。今日，集团的建筑获得最多绿色建筑标志奖，而他也有意让这个新项目角逐绿色建筑标志白金奖(BCA Green Mark Platinum Award）。
Thursday, December 6, 2007
贸工部：商业园楼面将增建 以缓解办公楼短缺
《联合早报》Dec 05, 2007
现在起到2010年 商业园楼面将增建 以缓解办公楼短缺 为了应付办公楼市场的短缺问题，贸工部将从现在至2010年，在樟宜商业园(Changi Business Park）、亚历山大分销园（Alexandra Distripark）、国际商业园（International Business Park）和纬壹科技城(one-north)等商业园，推出更多楼面供应量。
贸工部长林勋强昨天在新加坡房地产发展商公会（REDAS）常年晚宴上致词时也透露：“裕廊集团也正在挑选一些适合兴建商业园的地段，来作为公司的后端部门、金融机构的数据中心和应付中小型企业的需求。”
新加坡强劲的经济增长和蓬勃的旅游业，不但带动了本地的酒店和零售业，也推动各领域的房地产价格与租金攀升。这使到商业社群非常关注商业成本和租金的不断上涨。
国家发展部长马宝山不久前曾向外国投资者保证，新加坡作为一个首要金融中心的发展，不会因为现有的办公楼短缺问题而受到限制。政府已经积极采取措施来抒缓问题，包括推出临时办公楼地段，以及将空置的国有建筑物租给商家作办公用途。
林勋强昨天也重申，政府已经通过政府售地计划的策划工作，来确保将有足够的办公楼、私宅和酒店供应量。
数周内将公布明年上半年政府售地名单
国家发展部预料会在近几个星期内，公布2008年上半年的政府售地名单。由于本地办公楼市场正面对严重短缺问题，一般相信，即将出炉的名单应该会设法迎合市场的需求。贸工部的房地产供应量，也会被反映在2008年上半年的政府售地名单中。
林勋强昨天也鼓励本地发展商向海外展翅，其中一个方法是以合作的方式，联手进军海外房地产项目。他提议发展商公会与国际企业发展局配合，协助促进本地房地产发展商向海外出击。他指出，发展商公会一直与政府维持良好的合作关系，并且与政府努力配合，确保房地产市场的走势保持其长期持续性。例如不久前印尼禁止海沙出口时，发展商就协力分担沙石的成本上涨。此外，发展商也相当支持政府的绿色建筑计划。
他希望发展商公会能继续在人口老化、新加坡的建筑景观，以及环球竞争等方面，继续协助本地房地产业应付未来的挑战。
现在起到2010年 商业园楼面将增建 以缓解办公楼短缺 为了应付办公楼市场的短缺问题，贸工部将从现在至2010年，在樟宜商业园(Changi Business Park）、亚历山大分销园（Alexandra Distripark）、国际商业园（International Business Park）和纬壹科技城(one-north)等商业园，推出更多楼面供应量。
贸工部长林勋强昨天在新加坡房地产发展商公会（REDAS）常年晚宴上致词时也透露：“裕廊集团也正在挑选一些适合兴建商业园的地段，来作为公司的后端部门、金融机构的数据中心和应付中小型企业的需求。”
新加坡强劲的经济增长和蓬勃的旅游业，不但带动了本地的酒店和零售业，也推动各领域的房地产价格与租金攀升。这使到商业社群非常关注商业成本和租金的不断上涨。
国家发展部长马宝山不久前曾向外国投资者保证，新加坡作为一个首要金融中心的发展，不会因为现有的办公楼短缺问题而受到限制。政府已经积极采取措施来抒缓问题，包括推出临时办公楼地段，以及将空置的国有建筑物租给商家作办公用途。
林勋强昨天也重申，政府已经通过政府售地计划的策划工作，来确保将有足够的办公楼、私宅和酒店供应量。
数周内将公布明年上半年政府售地名单
国家发展部预料会在近几个星期内，公布2008年上半年的政府售地名单。由于本地办公楼市场正面对严重短缺问题，一般相信，即将出炉的名单应该会设法迎合市场的需求。贸工部的房地产供应量，也会被反映在2008年上半年的政府售地名单中。
林勋强昨天也鼓励本地发展商向海外展翅，其中一个方法是以合作的方式，联手进军海外房地产项目。他提议发展商公会与国际企业发展局配合，协助促进本地房地产发展商向海外出击。他指出，发展商公会一直与政府维持良好的合作关系，并且与政府努力配合，确保房地产市场的走势保持其长期持续性。例如不久前印尼禁止海沙出口时，发展商就协力分担沙石的成本上涨。此外，发展商也相当支持政府的绿色建筑计划。
他希望发展商公会能继续在人口老化、新加坡的建筑景观，以及环球竞争等方面，继续协助本地房地产业应付未来的挑战。
URA Revises Development Baseline
Source : TODAY, Thursday, December 6, 2007
Developers seeking to raise the plot ratios of properties will be subject to a new definition of the development baseline, used in the computation of the property development charge, from Jan 1.
The amendment, announced in 2003, had been deferred to allow the industry to adjust to the change, the Urban Redevelopment Authority said yesterday.
“Basically we want to have a more equitable tax system,” said URA’s deputy CEO (Development Control and Corporate Development) Tan Siong Leng.
“Somehow, because of historical reasons, the baseline is not related to what is existing on the site.”
Under the revised definition, the value of the approved development for a development site will form the development baseline, above which a development charge is payable.
The two historical baseline values in Master Plan (MP) 1958 and 1980 — which now form part of the definition of development baseline — will no longer be applicable.
Currently, development baselines are determined by the highest baseline in MP 1958, MP 1980 or that of the approved development. This creates an anomaly where some landowners do not need to pay development charge due to high historical baselines while other landowners will need to pay a development charge for planning approvals granted on their land.
To mitigate the impact of the revised baseline definition, the government has safeguarded the historical baseline up to the use and intensity allowed in the MP 2003.
Thus, private landowners who develop their land in accordance with the development potential of the current MP are not affected by the change and can make use of the safeguarded baseline to offset the DC payable after Jan 1 next year.
About 2 per cent or 1,700 land plots may be affected in the future.
The Government collects $250 million yearly in development charges and this could increase in the long term with the revised development baseline, noted Knight Frank’s head of research and consultancy, Mr Nicholas Mak.
Even though this means that developer’s profits may drop, it is unlikely to affect property prices as the sale price of a project is based on what the market can bear and not on the development charge, he added.
Developers seeking to raise the plot ratios of properties will be subject to a new definition of the development baseline, used in the computation of the property development charge, from Jan 1.
The amendment, announced in 2003, had been deferred to allow the industry to adjust to the change, the Urban Redevelopment Authority said yesterday.
“Basically we want to have a more equitable tax system,” said URA’s deputy CEO (Development Control and Corporate Development) Tan Siong Leng.
“Somehow, because of historical reasons, the baseline is not related to what is existing on the site.”
Under the revised definition, the value of the approved development for a development site will form the development baseline, above which a development charge is payable.
The two historical baseline values in Master Plan (MP) 1958 and 1980 — which now form part of the definition of development baseline — will no longer be applicable.
Currently, development baselines are determined by the highest baseline in MP 1958, MP 1980 or that of the approved development. This creates an anomaly where some landowners do not need to pay development charge due to high historical baselines while other landowners will need to pay a development charge for planning approvals granted on their land.
To mitigate the impact of the revised baseline definition, the government has safeguarded the historical baseline up to the use and intensity allowed in the MP 2003.
Thus, private landowners who develop their land in accordance with the development potential of the current MP are not affected by the change and can make use of the safeguarded baseline to offset the DC payable after Jan 1 next year.
About 2 per cent or 1,700 land plots may be affected in the future.
The Government collects $250 million yearly in development charges and this could increase in the long term with the revised development baseline, noted Knight Frank’s head of research and consultancy, Mr Nicholas Mak.
Even though this means that developer’s profits may drop, it is unlikely to affect property prices as the sale price of a project is based on what the market can bear and not on the development charge, he added.
New Development Charge Calculation Kicks In Next Year
Source : The Straits Times, Dec 6, 2007
It will address historical anomaly that allowed some landowners to avoid paying fees.
A SIMPLER way of calculating development charges will kick in from next year.
The net effect is that the Government is set to collect slightly more in the form of these charges, which are paid by landowners who want to enhance a site’s value - for example by redeveloping an existing project into a bigger one.
However, not all landowners will be affected. The impact on the market as a whole is expected to be minimal, involving perhaps 2 per cent of private land, or about 1,700 plots, said the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) yesterday.
The URA has also added safeguards to help those landowners who are affected by the change.
Broadly, the owners concerned own land that have very high development baselines, thanks to decades-old master plans. A development baseline is the highest maximum floor area allowed under master plans released in 1958 or 1980, or under an existing development already on the site.
These old master plans gave properties in some central parts of Singapore such as Holland Hill, unusually high development baseline values.
Because of this historical anomaly, owners of these land plots previously paid no development charges when they enhanced their land use.
But in future, they will have to fork out like everyone else if they want to build a bigger development on their sites.
This change, and its implementation start date, were announced back in 2003 in order to give landowners ample time to adapt to the change. Yesterday, the URA issued a reminder of the new calculation.
From Jan 1, the development baseline will be simply defined as the value of the approved development. The historical baseline values in the master plans of 1958 and 1980 will no longer play any part in the calculation.
The change will affect a small number of owners who own land with a high historical development potential, said Knight Frank’s director of research and consultancy Nicholas Mak.
If future master plans allow for a bigger development that is within their historical potential, these owners would have been able to redevelop their land without having to pay a development charge, he said.
With the change, they would have to pay the charge to do so.
To mitigate the impact of the change, the Government said the affected landowners may not have to pay a higher charge as long as they keep to the allowed use under the current master plan.
The master plan is revised every five years, but the next one expected around the middle of next year is unlikely to have major changes. The Government has said that there will not be a big exercise to raise a site’s development potential.
Still, if future master plans allow higher plot ratios, the affected owners would have to pay the charge to build up to the maximum space allowed, said Credo Real Estate’s managing director, Mr Karamjit Singh.
In the past five years, the URA has collected on average about $250 million in development charges a year.
It will address historical anomaly that allowed some landowners to avoid paying fees.
A SIMPLER way of calculating development charges will kick in from next year.
The net effect is that the Government is set to collect slightly more in the form of these charges, which are paid by landowners who want to enhance a site’s value - for example by redeveloping an existing project into a bigger one.
However, not all landowners will be affected. The impact on the market as a whole is expected to be minimal, involving perhaps 2 per cent of private land, or about 1,700 plots, said the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) yesterday.
The URA has also added safeguards to help those landowners who are affected by the change.
Broadly, the owners concerned own land that have very high development baselines, thanks to decades-old master plans. A development baseline is the highest maximum floor area allowed under master plans released in 1958 or 1980, or under an existing development already on the site.
These old master plans gave properties in some central parts of Singapore such as Holland Hill, unusually high development baseline values.
Because of this historical anomaly, owners of these land plots previously paid no development charges when they enhanced their land use.
But in future, they will have to fork out like everyone else if they want to build a bigger development on their sites.
This change, and its implementation start date, were announced back in 2003 in order to give landowners ample time to adapt to the change. Yesterday, the URA issued a reminder of the new calculation.
From Jan 1, the development baseline will be simply defined as the value of the approved development. The historical baseline values in the master plans of 1958 and 1980 will no longer play any part in the calculation.
The change will affect a small number of owners who own land with a high historical development potential, said Knight Frank’s director of research and consultancy Nicholas Mak.
If future master plans allow for a bigger development that is within their historical potential, these owners would have been able to redevelop their land without having to pay a development charge, he said.
With the change, they would have to pay the charge to do so.
To mitigate the impact of the change, the Government said the affected landowners may not have to pay a higher charge as long as they keep to the allowed use under the current master plan.
The master plan is revised every five years, but the next one expected around the middle of next year is unlikely to have major changes. The Government has said that there will not be a big exercise to raise a site’s development potential.
Still, if future master plans allow higher plot ratios, the affected owners would have to pay the charge to build up to the maximum space allowed, said Credo Real Estate’s managing director, Mr Karamjit Singh.
In the past five years, the URA has collected on average about $250 million in development charges a year.
Simpler Rules For Deciding DC Payment From Jan
Source : The Business Times, December 6, 2007
URA will use only 2003 Master Plan to cap development baseline values
RULES on whether proposed building works will have to pay a Development Charge are to be simplified.
The DC, which can be payable when land is redeveloped more intensively, is at present calculated using baselines set in the 2003 Master Plan, or sometimes with the earlier MPs of 1958 or 1980. From January 1, the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) intends to use only the 2003 MP to cap development baseline values.
However, some existing developments will have their higher baseline values safeguarded, and will be exempt from paying a DC even if the site is redeveloped to a baseline value higher than MP 2003.
After the recent increase in DC rates, the charge can in some cases amount to more than $100 million, which is a hefty amount compared to the average of $250 million that the URA has collected annually in DCs for the last five years.
The URA said yesterday that only about 2 per cent of all existing private land lots (or about about 1,700 plots mostly in the Central Region) have high historical baselines and even fewer approved developments are built over the plot ratios stipulated in MP 2003.
One such development, which is currently up for collective sale, is Pacific Mansion in River Valley.
Marketed by Savills Singapore, its director of investment, Steven Ming, estimates that the 45-year-old Pacific Mansion is currently built up to a 3.84 plot ratio.
Under the MP 2003, the plot ratio for the area is only 2.8, but Mr Ming says that the URA will permit any new development built on the site to be built up to the present plot ratio of 3.84, making the site particularly attractive as no development charge will be payable.
Mr Ming says that if the URA had not honoured the existing built up plot ratio and not given a development charge exemption, and instead levied development charges based on the existing gross floor area, the development charge for a new development built up to a plot ratio of 3.84 would amount to around $112.8 million, based on the current DC rate of $9,100 psm for the area. This, incidentally is almost three times the DC rate at the end of 2003 when it was about $2,300 psm.
The savings from not having to pay a DC is 'hypothetical', as most developers would have factored this into the land value. But as DC rates rise, so does this hypothetical development charge. Mr Ming adds: 'This is definitely a figure that a developer will consider when looking for a collective sale site.'
Another attractive site on the market is Elizabeth Towers at Mount Elizabeth which has an indicative price of $673 million or about $2,666 per square foot per plot ratio (psf ppr).
Marketed by Newman & Goh, its head of investment sales Jeffrey Goh estimates that the existing building is currently built up to a plot ratio of 4.65 while the plot ratio based on the MP 2003 is also 2.8.
And Mr Goh added: 'With Westwood Apartments (off Orchard Boulevard) setting a new benchmark price, I expect DC rates to be revised upwards again.'
As with Pacific Mansion, a redeveloped Elizabeth Towers can be built up to the existing built up plot ratio. And the charge of about $110 million, based on the current DC rate of $11,900 psm for the area, is not payable.
But there are not many of such sites around.
Also up for sale with no DC payable is Grange Heights on Grange Road. It is marketed by Jones Lang LaSalle, whose regional director, Lui Seng Fatt, says that not all old developments see such huge figures in the exempted DC amount. 'For many developments, it may be around $10 million,' he said.
Indeed, for most developments on the collective sales market, there will be no DC payable because the existing development has not been built up to the current MP 2003 plot ratio.
Willyn Ville at Holland Village is currently built up to an estimated 1.3 plot ratio, even though the plot ratio based on earlier MPs was higher than the 1.4 stipulated in MP 2003.
The difference of course is that Willyn Ville was never built up to the old plot ratios. It is marketed by Chesterton International, whose associate director, Mark Yuen, said: 'A development that has been built up over the existing MP 2003 is different because the government can't take back what has already been paid for.'
The revised baseline definition was first announced in 2003. Before the change, development baselines were determined by the highest baseline in MP 1958 or 1980 or that of the approved development.
URA will use only 2003 Master Plan to cap development baseline values
RULES on whether proposed building works will have to pay a Development Charge are to be simplified.
The DC, which can be payable when land is redeveloped more intensively, is at present calculated using baselines set in the 2003 Master Plan, or sometimes with the earlier MPs of 1958 or 1980. From January 1, the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) intends to use only the 2003 MP to cap development baseline values.
However, some existing developments will have their higher baseline values safeguarded, and will be exempt from paying a DC even if the site is redeveloped to a baseline value higher than MP 2003.
After the recent increase in DC rates, the charge can in some cases amount to more than $100 million, which is a hefty amount compared to the average of $250 million that the URA has collected annually in DCs for the last five years.
The URA said yesterday that only about 2 per cent of all existing private land lots (or about about 1,700 plots mostly in the Central Region) have high historical baselines and even fewer approved developments are built over the plot ratios stipulated in MP 2003.
One such development, which is currently up for collective sale, is Pacific Mansion in River Valley.
Marketed by Savills Singapore, its director of investment, Steven Ming, estimates that the 45-year-old Pacific Mansion is currently built up to a 3.84 plot ratio.
Under the MP 2003, the plot ratio for the area is only 2.8, but Mr Ming says that the URA will permit any new development built on the site to be built up to the present plot ratio of 3.84, making the site particularly attractive as no development charge will be payable.
Mr Ming says that if the URA had not honoured the existing built up plot ratio and not given a development charge exemption, and instead levied development charges based on the existing gross floor area, the development charge for a new development built up to a plot ratio of 3.84 would amount to around $112.8 million, based on the current DC rate of $9,100 psm for the area. This, incidentally is almost three times the DC rate at the end of 2003 when it was about $2,300 psm.
The savings from not having to pay a DC is 'hypothetical', as most developers would have factored this into the land value. But as DC rates rise, so does this hypothetical development charge. Mr Ming adds: 'This is definitely a figure that a developer will consider when looking for a collective sale site.'
Another attractive site on the market is Elizabeth Towers at Mount Elizabeth which has an indicative price of $673 million or about $2,666 per square foot per plot ratio (psf ppr).
Marketed by Newman & Goh, its head of investment sales Jeffrey Goh estimates that the existing building is currently built up to a plot ratio of 4.65 while the plot ratio based on the MP 2003 is also 2.8.
And Mr Goh added: 'With Westwood Apartments (off Orchard Boulevard) setting a new benchmark price, I expect DC rates to be revised upwards again.'
As with Pacific Mansion, a redeveloped Elizabeth Towers can be built up to the existing built up plot ratio. And the charge of about $110 million, based on the current DC rate of $11,900 psm for the area, is not payable.
But there are not many of such sites around.
Also up for sale with no DC payable is Grange Heights on Grange Road. It is marketed by Jones Lang LaSalle, whose regional director, Lui Seng Fatt, says that not all old developments see such huge figures in the exempted DC amount. 'For many developments, it may be around $10 million,' he said.
Indeed, for most developments on the collective sales market, there will be no DC payable because the existing development has not been built up to the current MP 2003 plot ratio.
Willyn Ville at Holland Village is currently built up to an estimated 1.3 plot ratio, even though the plot ratio based on earlier MPs was higher than the 1.4 stipulated in MP 2003.
The difference of course is that Willyn Ville was never built up to the old plot ratios. It is marketed by Chesterton International, whose associate director, Mark Yuen, said: 'A development that has been built up over the existing MP 2003 is different because the government can't take back what has already been paid for.'
The revised baseline definition was first announced in 2003. Before the change, development baselines were determined by the highest baseline in MP 1958 or 1980 or that of the approved development.
Asians Must Rethink Their Investment Model - Fast
Source : The Business Times, December 6, 2007
By ANTHONY ROWLEY
IN TOKYO
A REMARKABLE fact to emerge at a conference this week was just how little confidence Asian investors appear to have in their own region, and how great their faith is in the US as a safe haven for investment. At this time of great (and growing) stress in the US financial system, it is worth asking whether this faith is dangerously misplaced and whether Asians ought not to be redirecting their savings elsewhere.
Only 5.7 per cent of Asian investment portfolios are invested in Asian assets, according to a paper presented by Brandeis University international finance professor Peter Petri during the Asian Development Bank Institute conference in Tokyo. This is a staggeringly small sum and one that calls for an explanation that goes beyond the relatively limited size of Asian stock and bond markets compared to those in other parts of the world.
Where do Asians put their savings? No less than 44 per cent of them flow to the US and a further 36 per cent to the EU while 13.5 per cent go to other 'advanced' markets. In other words, Asians put a full 94 per cent of their savings into what they fondly imagine are safe markets and just 6-7 per cent into what they see as more risky emerging markets including those of Asia. Contrast this with the fact that EU countries invest no less than 65 per cent of their savings in their own countries.
It is not as though Asia has such limited capacity to absorb portfolio investment. For example, US investors deploy nearly 20 per cent of their money in the markets of this region while Europeans invest 6.4 per cent and the world as a whole nearly 9 per cent. So, it is obvious that the rest of the world thinks that Asian portfolio investments are a good bet, even if that view is not shared by Asians themselves,
Asians sell themselves short by such attitudes, and they expose themselves to all kinds of risks (currency risk, commercial risk and even sovereign risk) investing so much of their savings in overseas markets. This is symptomatic of a lack of self-confidence; a feeling that, for all the 'Asian miracle' on the economic front, Asia has not yet been able to build a credible financial system worthy of investors' confidence.
It is, of course, true that things such as standards of accounting norms, financial disclosure and corporate governance leave something to be desired in parts of this region, and that official regulation of markets is often not all that it needs to be in some places. It is also true that Asian financial systems tend to be bank-dominated, leaving bond markets in a state of under-development and arguably over-emphasising equity markets.
But all of these things pale alongside the financial debacle that has occurred in the US in the wake of the sub-prime mortgage crisis. There, in the heartland of capitalism and in the midst of Anglo-Saxon presumptions of financial superiority, a disaster is unfolding that should send any right-minded Asian investor dashing for the exit just as quick as he can.
Financial systems that can create the kind of havoc in mortgage markets, credit markets, etc, which the sub-prime crisis has done in the United States are not worthy of confidence.
Perhaps, as Asia has felt little direct pain yet from the sub-prime crisis, investors here have been lulled into believing that the worst is over. It is not. Injections of official liquidity may stave off a complete seizing up of the financial system but this just means the pain will have to be taken over a long period of time. Slashing interest rates will prevent some financial failures but expecting it to prevent a US recession is as futile as pushing on a piece of string.
To come back to Asia, while people here may have been wise to avoid financial system development of the kind that spawned derivatives and other exotica which served to mask underlying risks in the Anglo-Saxon world, they seem very gullible when it comes to recognising risk elsewhere. Hence the huge outflows of portfolio investment capital from this region into 'mature' markets.
Some might say it is a mark of Asia's own maturity that the region is able to attract sufficient foreign capital inflows to finance its own investment needs. But this raises two points. First, most Asian countries have, by most analyses, been under-investing in new production capacity since the Asian financial crisis 10 years ago; and, second, relying heavily upon foreign investment capital has turned Asia into a kind of offshore production platform.
Economists might argue also that as most Asian countries run big surpluses on current account, they must have a compensating deficit on capital account. But what this means is that the export-led model of Asian economic post-war development has been overdone and that the region is at risk now of seeing a massive meltdown in the value of the foreign financial assets it has piled up by the sweat of its brow. Time to rethink the model - and soon.
By ANTHONY ROWLEY
IN TOKYO
A REMARKABLE fact to emerge at a conference this week was just how little confidence Asian investors appear to have in their own region, and how great their faith is in the US as a safe haven for investment. At this time of great (and growing) stress in the US financial system, it is worth asking whether this faith is dangerously misplaced and whether Asians ought not to be redirecting their savings elsewhere.
Only 5.7 per cent of Asian investment portfolios are invested in Asian assets, according to a paper presented by Brandeis University international finance professor Peter Petri during the Asian Development Bank Institute conference in Tokyo. This is a staggeringly small sum and one that calls for an explanation that goes beyond the relatively limited size of Asian stock and bond markets compared to those in other parts of the world.
Where do Asians put their savings? No less than 44 per cent of them flow to the US and a further 36 per cent to the EU while 13.5 per cent go to other 'advanced' markets. In other words, Asians put a full 94 per cent of their savings into what they fondly imagine are safe markets and just 6-7 per cent into what they see as more risky emerging markets including those of Asia. Contrast this with the fact that EU countries invest no less than 65 per cent of their savings in their own countries.
It is not as though Asia has such limited capacity to absorb portfolio investment. For example, US investors deploy nearly 20 per cent of their money in the markets of this region while Europeans invest 6.4 per cent and the world as a whole nearly 9 per cent. So, it is obvious that the rest of the world thinks that Asian portfolio investments are a good bet, even if that view is not shared by Asians themselves,
Asians sell themselves short by such attitudes, and they expose themselves to all kinds of risks (currency risk, commercial risk and even sovereign risk) investing so much of their savings in overseas markets. This is symptomatic of a lack of self-confidence; a feeling that, for all the 'Asian miracle' on the economic front, Asia has not yet been able to build a credible financial system worthy of investors' confidence.
It is, of course, true that things such as standards of accounting norms, financial disclosure and corporate governance leave something to be desired in parts of this region, and that official regulation of markets is often not all that it needs to be in some places. It is also true that Asian financial systems tend to be bank-dominated, leaving bond markets in a state of under-development and arguably over-emphasising equity markets.
But all of these things pale alongside the financial debacle that has occurred in the US in the wake of the sub-prime mortgage crisis. There, in the heartland of capitalism and in the midst of Anglo-Saxon presumptions of financial superiority, a disaster is unfolding that should send any right-minded Asian investor dashing for the exit just as quick as he can.
Financial systems that can create the kind of havoc in mortgage markets, credit markets, etc, which the sub-prime crisis has done in the United States are not worthy of confidence.
Perhaps, as Asia has felt little direct pain yet from the sub-prime crisis, investors here have been lulled into believing that the worst is over. It is not. Injections of official liquidity may stave off a complete seizing up of the financial system but this just means the pain will have to be taken over a long period of time. Slashing interest rates will prevent some financial failures but expecting it to prevent a US recession is as futile as pushing on a piece of string.
To come back to Asia, while people here may have been wise to avoid financial system development of the kind that spawned derivatives and other exotica which served to mask underlying risks in the Anglo-Saxon world, they seem very gullible when it comes to recognising risk elsewhere. Hence the huge outflows of portfolio investment capital from this region into 'mature' markets.
Some might say it is a mark of Asia's own maturity that the region is able to attract sufficient foreign capital inflows to finance its own investment needs. But this raises two points. First, most Asian countries have, by most analyses, been under-investing in new production capacity since the Asian financial crisis 10 years ago; and, second, relying heavily upon foreign investment capital has turned Asia into a kind of offshore production platform.
Economists might argue also that as most Asian countries run big surpluses on current account, they must have a compensating deficit on capital account. But what this means is that the export-led model of Asian economic post-war development has been overdone and that the region is at risk now of seeing a massive meltdown in the value of the foreign financial assets it has piled up by the sweat of its brow. Time to rethink the model - and soon.
Be Vigilant About Asset Bubbles: Jackson Tai
Source : The Business Times, December 6, 2007
Falling lending standards among key risks in Asia
FALLING standards of lending due to intense competition among banks and 'too much money' driving asset prices up are some of the main risks to Asia's financial industry, said outgoing DBS Group chief executive Jackson Tai last week.
'Underwriting standards for loans and financings have deteriorated in the region, and this development comes on top of the US sub-prime mortgage problems,' he said in an interview with The Asian Banker. 'Intense competition, including that from foreign banks and institutions who have rediscovered Asia, have brought credit spreads to unsustainably low levels. The risk-adjusted return on loans is not where it should be.'
He was responding to a question on what worried him most in Asia's financial industry.
Lax lending practices at US mortgage lenders have been blamed for the sharp rise in bad loans there - especially in the sub-prime or high-risk mortgage segment - that triggered the recent turmoil in global financial markets. In Singapore, banks have seen rapid loans growth in recent months, although the proportion of bad loans remains low.
Last week, the latest monthly figures from the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) showed that total loans made by banks and other financial institutions here grew by 15.5 per cent to $224.1 billion at end-October from a year ago - the fastest yearly rate of growth since December 1996.
Some $16.2 billion or more than half of the $30.1 billion in loans added over the year were made to the property sector, comprising consumer home loans and business loans to the building and construction industry.
While Asian economies have recovered well from the financial crisis of 1997 and the region is now 'bounding with growth and optimism', 'we can't get too carried away about Asia's prospects', said Mr Tai.
Besides falling underwriting standards, 'we have the risk of asset values in the region going through the roof', he added.
'Yes, property and asset values have only just returned to pre-Asia financial crisis levels in many markets, but there is too much money and too much optimism chasing after assets.'
'We must be vigilant about asset bubbles in the region,' Mr Tai said.
Asia's rapid economic expansion in the past few years has attracted large amounts of foreign investment into financial assets such as shares, and fixed assets including property and infrastructure from global fund managers seeking higher returns and cash-rich countries in the Middle East.
Some economists fear that a sudden steep fall in share prices in China - which have nearly tripled over the past 12 months - could dampen economic growth there at a time when Asia is bracing itself for a sharp slowdown in US demand for exports.
On Monday, MAS warned in its latest twice-yearly Financial Stability Review that Singapore banks' profits could be hit in the short term by higher volatility in financial markets.
Falling lending standards among key risks in Asia
FALLING standards of lending due to intense competition among banks and 'too much money' driving asset prices up are some of the main risks to Asia's financial industry, said outgoing DBS Group chief executive Jackson Tai last week.
'Underwriting standards for loans and financings have deteriorated in the region, and this development comes on top of the US sub-prime mortgage problems,' he said in an interview with The Asian Banker. 'Intense competition, including that from foreign banks and institutions who have rediscovered Asia, have brought credit spreads to unsustainably low levels. The risk-adjusted return on loans is not where it should be.'
He was responding to a question on what worried him most in Asia's financial industry.
Lax lending practices at US mortgage lenders have been blamed for the sharp rise in bad loans there - especially in the sub-prime or high-risk mortgage segment - that triggered the recent turmoil in global financial markets. In Singapore, banks have seen rapid loans growth in recent months, although the proportion of bad loans remains low.
Last week, the latest monthly figures from the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) showed that total loans made by banks and other financial institutions here grew by 15.5 per cent to $224.1 billion at end-October from a year ago - the fastest yearly rate of growth since December 1996.
Some $16.2 billion or more than half of the $30.1 billion in loans added over the year were made to the property sector, comprising consumer home loans and business loans to the building and construction industry.
While Asian economies have recovered well from the financial crisis of 1997 and the region is now 'bounding with growth and optimism', 'we can't get too carried away about Asia's prospects', said Mr Tai.
Besides falling underwriting standards, 'we have the risk of asset values in the region going through the roof', he added.
'Yes, property and asset values have only just returned to pre-Asia financial crisis levels in many markets, but there is too much money and too much optimism chasing after assets.'
'We must be vigilant about asset bubbles in the region,' Mr Tai said.
Asia's rapid economic expansion in the past few years has attracted large amounts of foreign investment into financial assets such as shares, and fixed assets including property and infrastructure from global fund managers seeking higher returns and cash-rich countries in the Middle East.
Some economists fear that a sudden steep fall in share prices in China - which have nearly tripled over the past 12 months - could dampen economic growth there at a time when Asia is bracing itself for a sharp slowdown in US demand for exports.
On Monday, MAS warned in its latest twice-yearly Financial Stability Review that Singapore banks' profits could be hit in the short term by higher volatility in financial markets.
URA Ends Suspense With Award Of Marina View Site
Source : The Business Times, December 6, 2007
MGPA's bid is about half the price it paid for plot next door
The Urban Redevelopment Authority finally awarded Marina View Land Parcel B to Macquarie Global Property Advisors (MGPA) unit MGP Kimi Pte Ltd yesterday, about three weeks after the tender for the 99-year leasehold site closed.
The longer-than-usual time to evaluate the tender, which was based solely on price, had led market watchers to speculate the state's reserve price for the confirmed list site might not have been met. The reserve price for confirmed list sites is confidential, the URA said yesterday, when asked by BT.
The tender for the plot had attracted just two bids, and the higher offer, by MGP Kimi, of $779.42 psf ppr, was less than most market watchers had expected, even after factoring in a minimum hotel component stipulated for the plot.
MGPA's bid for Land Parcel B was about half the $1,409 psf ppr it paid for the next door Land Parcel A in September. However, the earlier site does not have any requirement for hotel use. Hotel land values are significantly lower than office values and this partly accounted for the lower bid for Land Parcel B, analysts have said.
Another factor was new caution that has set in among developers following the sub-prime lending crisis in the US. Office investors are especially wary, as the sub-prime lending worries may directly clip demand by big banks for Singapore office space. An extra concern is that the government has been stating that it will boost supply of office land in the next few years to alleviate the current shortage.
Notwithstanding all these factors, some market watchers had suspected that the top bid for Land Parcel B could have been below the state's reserve price and that it may not be awarded. And the long evaluation time added fuel to the speculation.
In the past, the government has indicated that its guideline is to award sites if the top bids are at least 85 per cent of the market value assessed by the Chief Valuer (CV). However, bids below the 85 per cent guideline may be accepted if there is ample evidence from recent property transactions of a market downturn, according to past government statements.
When quizzed on the 85 per cent guideline yesterday, the URA said: 'The Chief Valuer's estimated market value serves as a guide in evaluating tenders. However, the government reserves the right to reject any tender, regardless of the bid price. Tenders are evaluated taking into consideration all relevant factors, including CV's estimated market value.'
The authority said the tender evaluation for every state site, including Marina View Land Parcel B, involves a Tender Evaluation Committee comprising officials from a few government agencies including the URA, the Singapore Land Authority, and the CV's Office, who make their recommendation, which is then reviewed by a committee made up of the Ministers for National Development, Law, Finance and Trade and Industry. 'Sometimes the evaluation is more complex and can take more time,' it said.
Some market observers are wondering if longer tender evaluation periods will be a more normal occurrence if the government pumps up its land sales under the confirmed list for the first six months of next year, assuming that developers' cautious mood lingers for a while.
MGPA's bid is about half the price it paid for plot next door
The Urban Redevelopment Authority finally awarded Marina View Land Parcel B to Macquarie Global Property Advisors (MGPA) unit MGP Kimi Pte Ltd yesterday, about three weeks after the tender for the 99-year leasehold site closed.
The longer-than-usual time to evaluate the tender, which was based solely on price, had led market watchers to speculate the state's reserve price for the confirmed list site might not have been met. The reserve price for confirmed list sites is confidential, the URA said yesterday, when asked by BT.
The tender for the plot had attracted just two bids, and the higher offer, by MGP Kimi, of $779.42 psf ppr, was less than most market watchers had expected, even after factoring in a minimum hotel component stipulated for the plot.
MGPA's bid for Land Parcel B was about half the $1,409 psf ppr it paid for the next door Land Parcel A in September. However, the earlier site does not have any requirement for hotel use. Hotel land values are significantly lower than office values and this partly accounted for the lower bid for Land Parcel B, analysts have said.
Another factor was new caution that has set in among developers following the sub-prime lending crisis in the US. Office investors are especially wary, as the sub-prime lending worries may directly clip demand by big banks for Singapore office space. An extra concern is that the government has been stating that it will boost supply of office land in the next few years to alleviate the current shortage.
Notwithstanding all these factors, some market watchers had suspected that the top bid for Land Parcel B could have been below the state's reserve price and that it may not be awarded. And the long evaluation time added fuel to the speculation.
In the past, the government has indicated that its guideline is to award sites if the top bids are at least 85 per cent of the market value assessed by the Chief Valuer (CV). However, bids below the 85 per cent guideline may be accepted if there is ample evidence from recent property transactions of a market downturn, according to past government statements.
When quizzed on the 85 per cent guideline yesterday, the URA said: 'The Chief Valuer's estimated market value serves as a guide in evaluating tenders. However, the government reserves the right to reject any tender, regardless of the bid price. Tenders are evaluated taking into consideration all relevant factors, including CV's estimated market value.'
The authority said the tender evaluation for every state site, including Marina View Land Parcel B, involves a Tender Evaluation Committee comprising officials from a few government agencies including the URA, the Singapore Land Authority, and the CV's Office, who make their recommendation, which is then reviewed by a committee made up of the Ministers for National Development, Law, Finance and Trade and Industry. 'Sometimes the evaluation is more complex and can take more time,' it said.
Some market observers are wondering if longer tender evaluation periods will be a more normal occurrence if the government pumps up its land sales under the confirmed list for the first six months of next year, assuming that developers' cautious mood lingers for a while.
China's Ximeng Land wins coveted Sentosa Cove plot
Source : The Business Times, 06 December 2007
PEARL Island, the final bungalow plot at Sentosa Cove, was yesterday sold to the Singapore unit of China property conglomerate Ximeng Asset Holdings, which won the bidding with an offer of $215.65 million, which works out to $1,687.50 per square footper plot ratio (psf ppr).
The price offered by Ximeng Land (S) Pte Ltd is higher than the previous record for Sentosa Cove, the $1,099 psf ppr paid in September for The Green Collection, Sentosa Cove's only strata landed housingdevelopment.
'The new record price achieved in this sale signals the strong demand for Sentosa Cove's exclusive luxury real estate,' Sentosa Cove general manager Kemmy Tan said.
The expression of interest, which closed on Oct 25, was a hotcontest that drew seven bids from local and international developers.
It attracted interest from developers ranging from local conglomerates and foreign-listed companies to boutique developers known for high-end quality residences, Ms Tansaid.
The Ximeng Group has a strong track record of developing quality luxury homes in China. Its unit, Beijing Ximeng Real Estate Co, is a renowned developer of luxury building projects in Beijing, Yantai and Jinan.
'We believe that oursuccess in Singapore will be our springboard to further success in the region and beyond,' said Ximeng Land general manager Wu Xu Zhao.
Ximeng has received inquiries from several interested parties that are keen to own part of the development, headded.
The 99-year leasehold plot, which is located close to Tanjong Beach and the Tanjong Golf Course, occupies 14,840.4 square metres of land with a maximum permissible gross floor area of 11,872.3 sq m and a maximum permissible plot ratio of0.8.
It can hold 19 luxury waterfront villas, each with a private berth.
Ximeng Land is considering a two-into-one configuration that will double the space for each bungalow to offer owners more privacy and exclusivity, Mr Wu said. Thiswill mean that Pearl Island may only have nine large units instead of 19.
'Our top priority now is the appointment of an internationally renowned architect, landscape artist and interior designer,' Mr Wu added.
Ximeng Land said that theproperties on Pearl Island are expected to fetch record prices when they are launched.
'Sentosa has great potential with the integrated resort, as well as the unique offering of an oceanfront residential marina community, and Pearl Island is thelast land parcel of Sentosa Cove's islands made available for landed development,' a spokesman for Ximeng Land said.
This project marks Ximeng group's first investment outside China; it looks like it is not going to be its last.
'Thecompany is confident that there is still room for growth in the Singapore property market and is exploring opportunities,' the spokesman said.
PEARL Island, the final bungalow plot at Sentosa Cove, was yesterday sold to the Singapore unit of China property conglomerate Ximeng Asset Holdings, which won the bidding with an offer of $215.65 million, which works out to $1,687.50 per square footper plot ratio (psf ppr).
The price offered by Ximeng Land (S) Pte Ltd is higher than the previous record for Sentosa Cove, the $1,099 psf ppr paid in September for The Green Collection, Sentosa Cove's only strata landed housingdevelopment.
'The new record price achieved in this sale signals the strong demand for Sentosa Cove's exclusive luxury real estate,' Sentosa Cove general manager Kemmy Tan said.
The expression of interest, which closed on Oct 25, was a hotcontest that drew seven bids from local and international developers.
It attracted interest from developers ranging from local conglomerates and foreign-listed companies to boutique developers known for high-end quality residences, Ms Tansaid.
The Ximeng Group has a strong track record of developing quality luxury homes in China. Its unit, Beijing Ximeng Real Estate Co, is a renowned developer of luxury building projects in Beijing, Yantai and Jinan.
'We believe that oursuccess in Singapore will be our springboard to further success in the region and beyond,' said Ximeng Land general manager Wu Xu Zhao.
Ximeng has received inquiries from several interested parties that are keen to own part of the development, headded.
The 99-year leasehold plot, which is located close to Tanjong Beach and the Tanjong Golf Course, occupies 14,840.4 square metres of land with a maximum permissible gross floor area of 11,872.3 sq m and a maximum permissible plot ratio of0.8.
It can hold 19 luxury waterfront villas, each with a private berth.
Ximeng Land is considering a two-into-one configuration that will double the space for each bungalow to offer owners more privacy and exclusivity, Mr Wu said. Thiswill mean that Pearl Island may only have nine large units instead of 19.
'Our top priority now is the appointment of an internationally renowned architect, landscape artist and interior designer,' Mr Wu added.
Ximeng Land said that theproperties on Pearl Island are expected to fetch record prices when they are launched.
'Sentosa has great potential with the integrated resort, as well as the unique offering of an oceanfront residential marina community, and Pearl Island is thelast land parcel of Sentosa Cove's islands made available for landed development,' a spokesman for Ximeng Land said.
This project marks Ximeng group's first investment outside China; it looks like it is not going to be its last.
'Thecompany is confident that there is still room for growth in the Singapore property market and is exploring opportunities,' the spokesman said.
Hong Fok's Orchard Site Plans
Source : The Business Times, December 6, 2007
It plans to develop International Bldg site with $62m state plot it is buying
HONG FOK Corporation yesterday gave a glimpse of its plans for a commercial development on the combined site of its International Building property at Orchard Road and an adjoining 9,023 square feet plot along Claymore Hill that it plans to buy fromthe state for $62.35 million.
Based on earlier reports, International Building, inclusive of a surface carpark at the rear, has a total land area of 45,467 sq ft. In its statement to the Singapore Exchange, Hong Fok said that unless prior writtenpermission of the government is given, the land it plans to purchase from the state will be used together with its International Building site for the purpose of commercial development with a gross plot ratio not exceeding 6.16.
Market watcherssaid that based on this plot ratio, the combined 54,490 sq ft site - comprising International Building, including its surface carpark, and the state plot Hong Fok plans to buy - can be developed into a commercial project with 335,660 sq ft maximum grossfloor area (GFA). Assuming an 80 per cent efficiency, the net lettable area would work out to about 268,530 sq ft.
Hong Fok did not elaborate on its plans for International Building, but market watchers said that it has a few options. One wouldbe to do a full redevelopment on the enlarged site (including the state plot being purchased), involving tearing down the present 12-storey retail and office block.
Another option would be to spruce up the old block and connect it to a newextension that could be developed on the new site alone, or on the new site as well as the carpark.
Market watchers said that based on a full redevelopment scheme and assuming a 335,660 sq ft maximum GFA, the construction costs, fees and interestwould easily amount to about $170 million. They also reckoned that Hong Fok may have to pay a development charge to the state for building a bigger project.
In its release yesterday, Hong Fok said that it has accepted an offer by the SingaporeLand Authority to alienate the state land on a freehold basis for $62.35 million.
The offer was made following an application by Hong Fok to buy the land, and the proposed alienation is subject to several terms and conditions. Hong Fok will fundthe purchase by bank borrowings.
Hong Fok also owns The Concourse at Beach Road, where it is expected to develop apartments for sale.
On the stock market yesterday, Hong Fok ended six cents higher at $1.33.
It plans to develop International Bldg site with $62m state plot it is buying
HONG FOK Corporation yesterday gave a glimpse of its plans for a commercial development on the combined site of its International Building property at Orchard Road and an adjoining 9,023 square feet plot along Claymore Hill that it plans to buy fromthe state for $62.35 million.
Based on earlier reports, International Building, inclusive of a surface carpark at the rear, has a total land area of 45,467 sq ft. In its statement to the Singapore Exchange, Hong Fok said that unless prior writtenpermission of the government is given, the land it plans to purchase from the state will be used together with its International Building site for the purpose of commercial development with a gross plot ratio not exceeding 6.16.
Market watcherssaid that based on this plot ratio, the combined 54,490 sq ft site - comprising International Building, including its surface carpark, and the state plot Hong Fok plans to buy - can be developed into a commercial project with 335,660 sq ft maximum grossfloor area (GFA). Assuming an 80 per cent efficiency, the net lettable area would work out to about 268,530 sq ft.
Hong Fok did not elaborate on its plans for International Building, but market watchers said that it has a few options. One wouldbe to do a full redevelopment on the enlarged site (including the state plot being purchased), involving tearing down the present 12-storey retail and office block.
Another option would be to spruce up the old block and connect it to a newextension that could be developed on the new site alone, or on the new site as well as the carpark.
Market watchers said that based on a full redevelopment scheme and assuming a 335,660 sq ft maximum GFA, the construction costs, fees and interestwould easily amount to about $170 million. They also reckoned that Hong Fok may have to pay a development charge to the state for building a bigger project.
In its release yesterday, Hong Fok said that it has accepted an offer by the SingaporeLand Authority to alienate the state land on a freehold basis for $62.35 million.
The offer was made following an application by Hong Fok to buy the land, and the proposed alienation is subject to several terms and conditions. Hong Fok will fundthe purchase by bank borrowings.
Hong Fok also owns The Concourse at Beach Road, where it is expected to develop apartments for sale.
On the stock market yesterday, Hong Fok ended six cents higher at $1.33.
Sky @ Eleven Will Boost SPH Earnings: Tony Tan
Source : The Business Times, December 6, 2007
Analysts estimate project to yield up to $450m profit
SINGAPORE Press Holdings is expecting a significant boost to its profits for this financial year and the next - from its Sky@eleven condominium project. In his speech at the media group's annual general meeting yesterday, SPH chairman Tony Tan said:'On the property front, our launch of Sky@eleven, a luxury condominium project at Thomson Road, was greeted with overwhelming response. All 273 units were sold out within hours of the soft launch in January 2007.
' SPH will enjoy a significantboost to its profits in the next two financial years from contributions from Sky@eleven.'
'The last financial year has been a good year for SPH,' said Dr Tan. 'With group operating revenue of $1.16 billion, net profit attributable to shareholderscrossed the half-billion mark to hit $506.2 million.'
The group's $506.2 million net profit was 18.1 per cent higher than the previous year's $428.5 million, which included an exceptional gain of $66.8 million.
The FY2007 results includeda maiden profit recognition of $47.8 million from Sky@eleven. Profits from Sky@eleven are being recognised on a percentage-of-completion basis and temporary occupation permit (TOP) is expected in early 2010.
Analysts had estimated total profitsfrom the project at $350 million to $450 million.
At yesterday's AGM, some shareholders were concerned about the group's core print business, citing trends of declining newspaper readership in other developed countries.
Another shareholderasked about generating more revenue from online media. Responding, Dr Tan said that the group is continuing to invest in other media platforms.
'$100 million has been earmarked to invest in the Internet (business). So when the trends overseascome to Singapore, SPH will be prepared and be in a good position to exploit the online space.'
Like any new business venture, building revenue from online services will take time, he said.
Dr Tan also said that SPH is making furtherinroads into the online search business. Online search and directory services for the China and Singapore market are expected to be rolled out next year, as well as regional online classifieds, he said.
Both are part of the joint venture formedlast year with Norwegian media group Schibsted ASA. 'Online directory portals will be the future for SPH,' Dr Tan said.
The traditional core newspaper and magazine business continued to make up the bulk of profits for the group, and investing inits current stable of papers continues.
Singapore's first Chinese freesheet my paper will be revamped into a full-fledged bilingual newspaper early next year. It will have equal emphasis on the Chinese and English languages and will be expandedinto a 48-page paper from its current 24-page format.
'Circulation of our other newspapers, such as The Business Times, Berita Harian and Tamil Murasu, also registered creditable increases on the back of strong support from readers andadvertisers,' said Dr Tan.
SPH announced yesterday that directors Cheong Choong Kong and Lee Ek Tieng would step down. Dr Cheong was appointed a director of SPH in 1997. Mr Lee joined SPH as a director in 2001.
Analysts estimate project to yield up to $450m profit
SINGAPORE Press Holdings is expecting a significant boost to its profits for this financial year and the next - from its Sky@eleven condominium project. In his speech at the media group's annual general meeting yesterday, SPH chairman Tony Tan said:'On the property front, our launch of Sky@eleven, a luxury condominium project at Thomson Road, was greeted with overwhelming response. All 273 units were sold out within hours of the soft launch in January 2007.
' SPH will enjoy a significantboost to its profits in the next two financial years from contributions from Sky@eleven.'
'The last financial year has been a good year for SPH,' said Dr Tan. 'With group operating revenue of $1.16 billion, net profit attributable to shareholderscrossed the half-billion mark to hit $506.2 million.'
The group's $506.2 million net profit was 18.1 per cent higher than the previous year's $428.5 million, which included an exceptional gain of $66.8 million.
The FY2007 results includeda maiden profit recognition of $47.8 million from Sky@eleven. Profits from Sky@eleven are being recognised on a percentage-of-completion basis and temporary occupation permit (TOP) is expected in early 2010.
Analysts had estimated total profitsfrom the project at $350 million to $450 million.
At yesterday's AGM, some shareholders were concerned about the group's core print business, citing trends of declining newspaper readership in other developed countries.
Another shareholderasked about generating more revenue from online media. Responding, Dr Tan said that the group is continuing to invest in other media platforms.
'$100 million has been earmarked to invest in the Internet (business). So when the trends overseascome to Singapore, SPH will be prepared and be in a good position to exploit the online space.'
Like any new business venture, building revenue from online services will take time, he said.
Dr Tan also said that SPH is making furtherinroads into the online search business. Online search and directory services for the China and Singapore market are expected to be rolled out next year, as well as regional online classifieds, he said.
Both are part of the joint venture formedlast year with Norwegian media group Schibsted ASA. 'Online directory portals will be the future for SPH,' Dr Tan said.
The traditional core newspaper and magazine business continued to make up the bulk of profits for the group, and investing inits current stable of papers continues.
Singapore's first Chinese freesheet my paper will be revamped into a full-fledged bilingual newspaper early next year. It will have equal emphasis on the Chinese and English languages and will be expandedinto a 48-page paper from its current 24-page format.
'Circulation of our other newspapers, such as The Business Times, Berita Harian and Tamil Murasu, also registered creditable increases on the back of strong support from readers andadvertisers,' said Dr Tan.
SPH announced yesterday that directors Cheong Choong Kong and Lee Ek Tieng would step down. Dr Cheong was appointed a director of SPH in 1997. Mr Lee joined SPH as a director in 2001.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
