Sing Holdings

Good Sat Morning Everyone.

Is good news for the banks
http://www.straitstimes.com/business/pro...r-retirees

Under the change, the TDSR will no longer apply to such loans where the ratio of the loans, including any existing loans, to the property's value is 50 per cent or less. For example, a person with a $1 million home and a $100,000 outstanding housing loan can borrow up to $400,000 - that is, up to half the $1 million value of the property.
Under the old rules, he would also need to have ensured that his total debt servicing did not exceed 60 per cent of his monthly income, but this is no longer applicable. However, if the person in this example wants to borrow more than $400,000, he would not be exempt from TDSR.

but not so good news for the developers.
http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/pr...-are-eased

Financial consultant Sanjay Ashok Wadhwani said: "I don't think the SSD changes will affect me so much. As a buyer, the ABSD and LTV would have a bigger impact, but those were not changed."

A quote from a friend : So more people are have intentions to sell will do so. Will this hit new launches?

And QC is still there for developers
http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/dev...d-deadline

<Not a call to Buy or Sell>

Are there any other developers which have landbank which will make a material difference in nav vs their current share price other than sing holdings?

even though fernvale is only ONE project, it will make a significant contribution even if we assume they sell at 1,0xxpsf on average.

other big developers with landbank: by now well known and price spiked, bukit sembawang, citydev.

(11-03-2017, 04:10 PM)bargainhunter Wrote: Are there any other developers which have landbank which will make a material difference in nav vs their current share price other than sing holdings?

even though fernvale is only ONE project, it will make a significant contribution even if we assume they sell at 1,0xxpsf on average.

other big developers with landbank:  by now well known and price spiked, bukit sembawang, citydev.

There are very few. Most of them have been beaten to death, but Sing Holdings is relatively untalked about. But sooner or later, people will start looking at this gem.

After so many years one should understand modus operandi of the management. They are conservative and stick to doing one project at a time. There are cons and minus. Because they are conservative and working on one project at a time their projects do well compared to other developers. Minus is opportunities lost due to risk averse. One good example is Oxley. It has so many projects and some of them do well and some don't.

Hence one need to assess own risk profile and choose what suits you.

Like most other developers, Sing Holdings has transferred the unsold Robin Residence units to another company.

http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/Announce...eID=442985

(12-03-2017, 09:00 PM)CY09 Wrote: Like most other developers, Sing Holdings has transferred the unsold Robin Residence units to another company.

http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/Announce...eID=442985

I thought in the latest announcement, this property holding entity (PHE) will be taxed? Or the new rule is not effective yet. Sing Holdings managed to beat the deadline?

I just read the news release again by the government. The new property tax stamp duty ACD only applies FROM 11 March 2017 onwards.

However, Sing Holdings disposal was done on 10 March 2017. So technically, it beat the effective date.

(12-03-2017, 09:27 PM)luckystar Wrote: I just read the news release again by the government. The new property tax stamp duty ACD only applies FROM 11 March 2017 onwards.

However, Sing Holdings disposal was done on 10 March 2017. So technically, it beat the effective date.

in short, sing holdings found a buyer within 12 hours of the announcement.  

(12-03-2017, 09:00 PM)CY09 Wrote: Like most other developers, Sing Holdings has transferred the unsold Robin Residence units to another company.

http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/Announce...eID=442985

Based on the announcement, Sing Holding sold the remain 29 units at a lost of around 4 millions? This is based on the following statement.

"assuming that the SHR Disposal was effected on 1 January 2016, the Group’s earnings per share would have decreased from 6.55 cents to about 5.59 cents; "

Why is Sing Holdings rash to sell the reminding 29 units below cost? Is it because of QC? If IIRC, the QC will only due at end Dec 2017 since the project end Dec 2015? Even if it is because QC, the penalty should be lower than 40 mil as they had already sold 105 units or 78% of the total units.

Based on the unaudited consolidated financial statements of the Group for the year ended 31
December 2016:
(a) assuming that the SHR Disposal was effected on 1 January 2016, the Group’s earnings per
share would have decreased from 6.55 cents to about 5.59 cents; and
(b) assuming that the SHR Disposal was effected on 31 December 2016, the financial impact
on the Group’s net tangible asset per share would not be material.

Loss based on previous year's nta was 0.96c = $3.85m

However, Right at the end of Dec 2016: Allowance for impairment of completed properties for sale = $3.4m

Therefore, upon completion of sale = Recognize loss of $485k.

Cash collected upon completion of sale = $0.1813

Do you guys view this as positive or negative?