The Property Industry Finally Speaks Up

[thaigene2]

Finally - the denial is over.

Visa restrictions + No loans for foreigners + Foreigners barred from owning land + competition from neighbouring countries = a gloomy property outlook.

Well done CBRE - let's hope they listen.

From today's bangkok post --

PROPERTY / FINANCING, RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT & FOREIGN INVESTMENT

CBRE: Laws impede market

Southeast Asian countries are competing to attract retirement and second-home purchasers so Thailand should relax property ownership laws, financing restrictions and cumbersome visa policies to be competitive, said a report from CB Richard Ellis Thailand (CBRE).

Executive director James Pitchon said Thailand was attractive to retirement and second home (RSH) buyers as the country is centrally located with modern infrastructure and facilities to serve the needs of retirees. Thailand also offers an attractive combination of quality of living compared to cost and reasonably priced medical care.

The trend is similar to the property market in other regions including Spain, Florida and Australia's gold coast where the RSH purchasers have been major buyers. However, Thailand still has restrictive property ownership rules that the government should review. Experts are urging the government to eliminate foreign ownership restrictions or grant up to 90 years for land leaseholds and increase the quota of foreign freehold ownership in condominiums, currently allowed at 49% of projects.

The private sector is also urging the government to allow foreigners to receive funding for their property purchases from local financial institutions and relax Thailand's cumbersome visa policies. Thailand has introduced a retirement visa, where people aged below 55 years receive a 90-day visa while foreigners above this age receive a six-month visa. About 12,000 foreigners had successfully applied in the first seven months of 2006.

Mr Pitchon said Thailand was facing growing competition from Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and Vietnam to attract RSH purchasers.

Malaysia has been the most aggressive country in providing attractive property ownership, property financing and visa structures.

For example, the "Malaysia My Second Home" programme allows foreign ownership of land with houses, the ability for foreigners to borrow money to fund property purchases and a 10-year visa. In 2006, 8,700 people had successfully applied under this scheme.

In Singapore, overseas buyers are permitted to hold 99-year leases for land with houses in Sentosa Cove, the only place in Singapore where foreign land ownership is permitted. The country has no restriction on foreign ownership of condominium developments. Vietnam allows foreigners 50-year leases while China allows 70 year-leases. Many Latin American countries have no restrictions on foreign ownership.

[quiksilva]

They will never listen.

This certainly holds the market back from further growth but it is not responsible for a slow market. Its always been this way.

This article is nothing more than method to keep their name in the paper.

[Jingthing]

. Thailand has introduced a retirement visa, where people aged below 55 years receive a 90-day visa while foreigners above this age receive a six-month visa.

What are they talking about? This sounds totally wrong.

[samran]

what would really create a change in the market was if banks could be encouraged to lend more liberally (to Thai's) for second hand properties. The lack of financing makes the second hand market highly illiquid, where you'll be lucky to get 60-70% of what you need versus 100% for a new property. A more liquid market would lead to better pricing signals for buyers and sellers, and there generally would be a freeing up of a lot of housing stock which is just sitting around gathering dust a huge waste of existing resources in my opinion.

It would shift the focus to better building standards in the longer run (people wanting to protect their investment) and a re-alignment in the industry towards less new builds and more renovations, upgrades etc etc.

But you'll never see ole' James arguing for that, will you now!

[steveromagnino]

what would really create a change in the market was if banks could be encouraged to lend more liberally (to Thai's) for second hand properties. The lack of financing makes the second hand market highly illiquid, where you'll be lucky to get 60-70% of what you need versus 100% for a new property. A more liquid market would lead to better pricing signals for buyers and sellers, and there generally would be a freeing up of a lot of housing stock which is just sitting around gathering dust a huge waste of existing resources in my opinion.

It would shift the focus to better building standards in the longer run (people wanting to protect their investment) and a re-alignment in the industry towards less new builds and more renovations, upgrades etc etc.

But you'll never see ole' James arguing for that, will you now!

there are some who think that a focus away from property and towards building up sectors of the economy and infrastructure would be a better use of cash as per the Singaporean HDB housing model - property is one of the least productive investments i can think of in that all the cash generated in the TRT era from property sales has minimal effect in generating net new jobs and ongoing competitive advantage vs. a similar investment in a more active industry. Surely, for instance, reform of the telco environment to improve cost of communication; or deregulation of energy industry to reduce costs would be more useful.

But I bet you don't see CBRE talking about that either.

Instead you see self serving generalities either:

- the market is totally booming

- comments of decline are wrong OR

- market needs XYZ policy to improve

Maroons the lot of them. Emperor Tudd is right, everything is lousy here, everything sucks. Which is why I am so pleased I have 2 clients in property raising major cash right now and selling just fine :-)

[bendix]

what would really create a change in the market was if banks could be encouraged to lend more liberally (to Thai's) for second hand properties. The lack of financing makes the second hand market highly illiquid, where you'll be lucky to get 60-70% of what you need versus 100% for a new property. A more liquid market would lead to better pricing signals for buyers and sellers, and there generally would be a freeing up of a lot of housing stock which is just sitting around gathering dust a huge waste of existing resources in my opinion.

It would shift the focus to better building standards in the longer run (people wanting to protect their investment) and a re-alignment in the industry towards less new builds and more renovations, upgrades etc etc.

But you'll never see ole' James arguing for that, will you now!

Oh come on samran. You must realise that making conditions more advantageous for around 50,000 farang potential homebuyers is going to have a much more significant impact on Thailand's property market than liberalising conditions for 50,000,000 Thais.

You do know, don't you, that Thailand completely relies on us big white folk to survive, right?

Sometimes you just miss the point completely.

[bkkandrew]

what would really create a change in the market was if banks could be encouraged to lend more liberally (to Thai's) for second hand properties. The lack of financing makes the second hand market highly illiquid, where you'll be lucky to get 60-70% of what you need versus 100% for a new property. A more liquid market would lead to better pricing signals for buyers and sellers, and there generally would be a freeing up of a lot of housing stock which is just sitting around gathering dust a huge waste of existing resources in my opinion.

It would shift the focus to better building standards in the longer run (people wanting to protect their investment) and a re-alignment in the industry towards less new builds and more renovations, upgrades etc etc.

But you'll never see ole' James arguing for that, will you now!

there are some who think that a focus away from property and towards building up sectors of the economy and infrastructure would be a better use of cash as per the Singaporean HDB housing model - property is one of the least productive investments i can think of in that all the cash generated in the TRT era from property sales has minimal effect in generating net new jobs and ongoing competitive advantage vs. a similar investment in a more active industry. Surely, for instance, reform of the telco environment to improve cost of communication; or deregulation of energy industry to reduce costs would be more useful.

But I bet you don't see CBRE talking about that either.

Instead you see self serving generalities either:

- the market is totally booming

- comments of decline are wrong OR

- market needs XYZ policy to improve

Maroons the lot of them. Emperor Tudd is right, everything is lousy here, everything sucks. Which is why I am so pleased I have 2 clients in property raising major cash right now and selling just fine :-)

In your next post, try to repeat the words: Clear, concise, comprehendable; before flexing your digits...

[samran]

Oh come on samran. You must realise that making conditions more advantageous for around 50,000 farang potential homebuyers is going to have a much more significant impact on Thailand's property market than liberalising conditions for 50,000,000 Thais.

You do know, don't you, that Thailand completely relies on us big white folk to survive, right?

Sometimes you just miss the point completely.

yes saheeb,

I shall direct the constitutional drafting committee (at your pleasure) to add the clause that one Thai is counted as 1/1000th of a Farang.

In the meantime, I shall go and castrate myself (again) for being so demeaning to the big white god from the lands of milk and honey who bring their 80 pound a week pension cheques with them.....

[Fred Sanford]

So bottom line is that things are made tough for farangs and tough for Thais. It dont sound too promising

[thaigene2]

Of course CBREs points are self-serving. But it's interesting to see these things actually said publicly. Before it was just guys like me - and a few others saying this - you know 'the whiners'..who were 'exagerating' everything. When senior salespeople start saying it publicly - alarm bells are ringing loudly behind closed doors I'll bet.

I think - okay I 'think' - Pitchon's main point is that the retiree market from developed countries wanting a 2nd home is a growth industry as long as the world economy doesn't tank (yeah, yeah, I know)..and if Thailand wants a piece of the action it needs to become more open - not more closed. There are only so many 'millionaires' out there, but an awful lot more mid-market earners.

Otherwise those people will go elsewhere. All the goods and services that spring up with middle-class investment will also go elsewhere. That's all..

Edited July 19, 2007 by thaigene2

[dsfbrit]

Of course CBREs points are self-serving. But it's interesting to see these things actually said publicly. Before it was just guys like me - and a few others saying this - you know 'the whiners'..who were 'exagerating' everything. When senior salespeople start saying it publicly - alarm bells are ringing loudly behind closed doors I'll bet.

I think - okay I 'think' - Pitchon's main point is that the retiree market from developed countries wanting a 2nd home is a growth industry as long as the world economy doesn't tank (yeah, yeah, I know)..and if Thailand wants a piece of the action it needs to become more open - not more closed. There are only so many 'millionaires' out there, but an awful lot more mid-market earners.

Otherwise those people will go elsewhere. All the goods and services that spring up with middle-class investment will also go elsewhere. That's all..

I agree. I am one of these retirees - not a millioanaire (Baht millionaire only!), but at 53 decided to sell up in my home country and retire out here. I bought a house through the company route (normal practise in Thailand - nominees for companies -everyone does it - I was told - even the multi-nationals blah blah blah...). Dont bother flaming me - we all know I am a 'pratt' in some peoples eyes!! However there are a lot of other people like me out there now switching to 30 year leases or Ususfructs or whatever. What a mess !!! who wants the hassle of all that!

What good is a 30 years lease anyway - when I was 20 I never thought I would live to be 50! Now I am 53 I cannot imagine being 80!!

Yet my mum is 87!!! bless her - so I would be booted out of my home when I am 83! Then what??

Lets hope at that age I still have my wits about me and some money in the bank - at least enough for the visa renewal - or I wont have a house NOR will I have a country to live in either!

I would never have bought a house in Thailand if I had better understood the way the Thai authorities would change the way they implemented their laws. I have advised all my chums in the UK and elsewhere to avoid buying property in Thailand.

It seems logical - that now people like me fully understand the thinking of the Thai authorities towards Farang house/land ownership - no more nonsence about land ownership - that we would not want buy a house here.

The Housing market is as bad as it is at last being publicly stated by this thread. This needs to be stated more and more and maybe the FBA will be watered down!

By the way there are now 9 house for re-sale in this estate outside Pattaya. They have come on the market steadily since Jan 2006. Ranging from 3mill to 7million Baht. Only one has been rented out and the rest just sit there empty.

Edited July 20, 2007 by dsfbrit

[samran]

Of course CBREs points are self-serving. But it's interesting to see these things actually said publicly. Before it was just guys like me - and a few others saying this - you know 'the whiners'..who were 'exagerating' everything. When senior salespeople start saying it publicly - alarm bells are ringing loudly behind closed doors I'll bet.

I think - okay I 'think' - Pitchon's main point is that the retiree market from developed countries wanting a 2nd home is a growth industry as long as the world economy doesn't tank (yeah, yeah, I know)..and if Thailand wants a piece of the action it needs to become more open - not more closed. There are only so many 'millionaires' out there, but an awful lot more mid-market earners.

Otherwise those people will go elsewhere. All the goods and services that spring up with middle-class investment will also go elsewhere. That's all..

I bet one of Pitchons main markets is the cashed up expat, so he is protecting his own hide, and not necessarily looking out for yours.

I think the only point myeself and others are making is there are more fundamental changes which need to be made to the market to make it healthier. A healthier market is a benefit to all involved, including expats. The market as a whole is in 'crisis' because of the lack of liquidity, not because a few people don't have rights to stay here or own property. You need to fix the problems at a grass roots level first.

To say "When senior salespeople start saying it publicly - alarm bells are ringing loudly behind closed doors" is pretty far off the mark. Everyone will see what the comment for what it is for: a self serving way to get government to keep his company afloat.

[Edonista]

what would really create a change in the market was if banks could be encouraged to lend more liberally (to Thai's) for second hand properties. The lack of financing makes the second hand market highly illiquid, where you'll be lucky to get 60-70% of what you need versus 100% for a new property. A more liquid market would lead to better pricing signals for buyers and sellers, and there generally would be a freeing up of a lot of housing stock which is just sitting around gathering dust a huge waste of existing resources in my opinion.

It would shift the focus to better building standards in the longer run (people wanting to protect their investment) and a re-alignment in the industry towards less new builds and more renovations, upgrades etc etc.

But you'll never see ole' James arguing for that, will you now!

Oh come on samran. You must realise that making conditions more advantageous for around 50,000 farang potential homebuyers is going to have a much more significant impact on Thailand's property market than liberalising conditions for 50,000,000 Thais.

You do know, don't you, that Thailand completely relies on us big white folk to survive, right?

Sometimes you just miss the point completely.

Some people instead just miss the point everytime.

[pkrv]

What an interesting thread. All this is answered by just two phrases:

Market Trasnparancy

Secular ideals

[lotus eater]

what would really create a change in the market was if banks could be encouraged to lend more liberally (to Thai's) for second hand properties. The lack of financing makes the second hand market highly illiquid, where you'll be lucky to get 60-70% of what you need versus 100% for a new property. A more liquid market would lead to better pricing signals for buyers and sellers, and there generally would be a freeing up of a lot of housing stock which is just sitting around gathering dust a huge waste of existing resources in my opinion.

It would shift the focus to better building standards in the longer run (people wanting to protect their investment) and a re-alignment in the industry towards less new builds and more renovations, upgrades etc etc.

But you'll never see ole' James arguing for that, will you now!

It seems to me that the lack of demand for second hand properties on the part of thais has far more to do with social or psychological traits than with a comparison of financing options. Whether or not "better building standards" would change that I don't know.

[dr_Pat_Pong]

Oh come on samran. You must realise that making conditions more advantageous for around 50,000 farang potential homebuyers is going to have a much more significant impact on Thailand's property market than liberalising conditions for 50,000,000 Thais.

You do know, don't you, that Thailand completely relies on us big white folk to survive, right?

Sometimes you just miss the point completely.

yes saheeb,

I shall direct the constitutional drafting committee (at your pleasure) to add the clause that one Thai is counted as 1/1000th of a Farang.

In the meantime, I shall go and castrate myself (again) for being so demeaning to the big white god from the lands of milk and honey who bring their 80 pound a week pension cheques with them.....

[samran]

what would really create a change in the market was if banks could be encouraged to lend more liberally (to Thai's) for second hand properties. The lack of financing makes the second hand market highly illiquid, where you'll be lucky to get 60-70% of what you need versus 100% for a new property. A more liquid market would lead to better pricing signals for buyers and sellers, and there generally would be a freeing up of a lot of housing stock which is just sitting around gathering dust a huge waste of existing resources in my opinion.

It would shift the focus to better building standards in the longer run (people wanting to protect their investment) and a re-alignment in the industry towards less new builds and more renovations, upgrades etc etc.

But you'll never see ole' James arguing for that, will you now!

It seems to me that the lack of demand for second hand properties on the part of thais has far more to do with social or psychological traits than with a comparison of financing options. Whether or not "better building standards" would change that I don't know.

Indeed.

But if you put money on the table, I think alot of these social traits would go out the window. Economics, is economics to a large extent.

[cmsally]

Does the financing situation affect the second hand market? I have always been led to understand from Thai friends that when financing a purchase it is easier /cheaper if buying new. Is that the case?

[samran]

Does the financing situation affect the second hand market? I have always been led to understand from Thai friends that when financing a purchase it is easier /cheaper if buying new. Is that the case?

from my exprience banks are pretty risk adverse to lending for second hand properties. So they'll only value the place at 80% of the selling price then they'll only give you 80% of that. Means a big cash deposit needed - something that is a big ask for middle class families.

So....they'll go for the 95% or 100% full loan, no deposit needed new build house/condo.

[lotus eater]

what would really create a change in the market was if banks could be encouraged to lend more liberally (to Thai's) for second hand properties. The lack of financing makes the second hand market highly illiquid, where you'll be lucky to get 60-70% of what you need versus 100% for a new property. A more liquid market would lead to better pricing signals for buyers and sellers, and there generally would be a freeing up of a lot of housing stock which is just sitting around gathering dust a huge waste of existing resources in my opinion.

It would shift the focus to better building standards in the longer run (people wanting to protect their investment) and a re-alignment in the industry towards less new builds and more renovations, upgrades etc etc.

But you'll never see ole' James arguing for that, will you now!

It seems to me that the lack of demand for second hand properties on the part of thais has far more to do with social or psychological traits than with a comparison of financing options. Whether or not "better building standards" would change that I don't know.

Indeed.

But if you put money on the table, I think alot of these social traits would go out the window. Economics, is economics to a large extent.

So unless and until the situation changes the second hand houses on the market should offer very good value for anyone able to pay cash - as long as the place is well built.

But would this reasoning extend to the better quality places or does it apply only to the lower quality second hand houses built by less affluent thais?

[samran]

So unless and until the situation changes the second hand houses on the market should offer very good value for anyone able to pay cash - as long as the place is well built.

But would this reasoning extend to the better quality places or does it apply only to the lower quality second hand houses built by less affluent thais?

Value is in the eye of the beholder. But, sure you can buy with cash. The question is, are you going to be able to sell as easily?

My point is that there aren't proper pricing signals in the market. Just looking around myself you get all ranges of prices for something remarkably similar - which says to me people don't really have a benchmark to compare things to (unless you count baht/square metre - but those are based on asking prices, rather than actual selling prices). You need a second hand condo market where things are actively being traded to get a good idea of that a price should be. To be able to do this, people have to have the ablity to enter the market in sufficient numbers to ensure a regular turn over. This I don't beleive is happening for second hand condo's. But that is just a feeling. No stats to proove it.

[Old Man River]

They will never listen.

This certainly holds the market back from further growth but it is not responsible for a slow market. Its always been this way.

This article is nothing more than method to keep their name in the paper.

I totally agree (apart from the comment on CBRE - friends and all, you understand).

[jas007]

I guess my situation is fairly typical. I 56 years old with a retirement visa, from the USA. I moved to Thailand last year and have entertained the idea of buying some property (condo or leasehold house). But I haven't, and I may not. Again yesterday, I was thinking about Malaysia. There I can buy a house. There I can buy a condo. And there I can get a retirement visa good for five years (or is it 10?). In any event, one gets the feeling of some stability and the feeling that the country actually wants to attract foreign retirees. In Thailand, everything seems just the opposite. Yes, I have a retirement visa, but only for a one year period, and even at that they seem to come up with a new set of rules every month or so. In Thailand I can own a condo, but what about a house? No. I can only conclude that Thailand doesn't really care if the foreign retirees are here or not. So I rent, and when I want to leave, me and my money will leave. I guess that's simple. Too bad for Thailand, though.

J

[klikster]

what would really create a change in the market was if banks could be encouraged to lend more liberally (to Thai's) for second hand properties. The lack of financing makes the second hand market highly illiquid, where you'll be lucky to get 60-70% of what you need versus 100% for a new property. A more liquid market would lead to better pricing signals for buyers and sellers, and there generally would be a freeing up of a lot of housing stock which is just sitting around gathering dust a huge waste of existing resources in my opinion.

It would shift the focus to better building standards in the longer run (people wanting to protect their investment) and a re-alignment in the industry towards less new builds and more renovations, upgrades etc etc.

But you'll never see ole' James arguing for that, will you now!

June of last year we got financing on 2nd hand property with 20% down .. 30 year mortgage. Actually, I wouldn't encourage any economy to loan 100% on property. Just my opinion.

[thaigene2]

June of last year we got financing on 2nd hand property with 20% down .. 30 year mortgage. Actually, I wouldn't encourage any economy to loan 100% on property. Just my opinion.

Klikster.

I assume this was a 2nd hand house, not a condo. And since you said 'we' I assume you mean a Thai spouse who got the mortgage in her name since the property would of course be solely in her name?

If it was a condo in your name..that would be interesting to hearn more about.

[maipleur]

Of course CBREs points are self-serving. But it's interesting to see these things actually said publicly. Before it was just guys like me - and a few others saying this - you know 'the whiners'..who were 'exagerating' everything. When senior salespeople start saying it publicly - alarm bells are ringing loudly behind closed doors I'll bet.

I think - okay I 'think' - Pitchon's main point is that the retiree market from developed countries wanting a 2nd home is a growth industry as long as the world economy doesn't tank (yeah, yeah, I know)..and if Thailand wants a piece of the action it needs to become more open - not more closed. There are only so many 'millionaires' out there, but an awful lot more mid-market earners.

Otherwise those people will go elsewhere. All the goods and services that spring up with middle-class investment will also go elsewhere. That's all..

I agree. I am one of these retirees - not a millioanaire (Baht millionaire only!), but at 53 decided to sell up in my home country and retire out here. I bought a house through the company route (normal practise in Thailand - nominees for companies -everyone does it - I was told - even the multi-nationals blah blah blah...). Dont bother flaming me - we all know I am a 'pratt' in some peoples eyes!! However there are a lot of other people like me out there now switching to 30 year leases or Ususfructs or whatever. What a mess !!! who wants the hassle of all that!

What good is a 30 years lease anyway - when I was 20 I never thought I would live to be 50! Now I am 53 I cannot imagine being 80!!

Yet my mum is 87!!! bless her - so I would be booted out of my home when I am 83! Then what??

Lets hope at that age I still have my wits about me and some money in the bank - at least enough for the visa renewal - or I wont have a house NOR will I have a country to live in either!

I would never have bought a house in Thailand if I had better understood the way the Thai authorities would change the way they implemented their laws. I have advised all my chums in the UK and elsewhere to avoid buying property in Thailand.

It seems logical - that now people like me fully understand the thinking of the Thai authorities towards Farang house/land ownership - no more nonsence about land ownership - that we would not want buy a house here.

The Housing market is as bad as it is at last being publicly stated by this thread. This needs to be stated more and more and maybe the FBA will be watered down!

By the way there are now 9 house for re-sale in this estate outside Pattaya. They have come on the market steadily since Jan 2006. Ranging from 3mill to 7million Baht. Only one has been rented out and the rest just sit there empty.

I think you have summed that up very well. I think you might have posted what many are feeling and when you work for so many years to get liquid, you should not have to be worried in your old age about where you going to live..

I would like to know when this 30/30/30 lease will be tested. Does anyone know if anyone has had a lease for 30 years and the next 30 year renewal was passed on free of hassles.. I realize in this 30/30/30 year lease structure, that the next of kin etc has to sign??>.. maybe Im wrong, but please educate me.

[dsfbrit]

Of course CBREs points are self-serving. But it's interesting to see these things actually said publicly. Before it was just guys like me - and a few others saying this - you know 'the whiners'..who were 'exagerating' everything. When senior salespeople start saying it publicly - alarm bells are ringing loudly behind closed doors I'll bet.

I think - okay I 'think' - Pitchon's main point is that the retiree market from developed countries wanting a 2nd home is a growth industry as long as the world economy doesn't tank (yeah, yeah, I know)..and if Thailand wants a piece of the action it needs to become more open - not more closed. There are only so many 'millionaires' out there, but an awful lot more mid-market earners.

Otherwise those people will go elsewhere. All the goods and services that spring up with middle-class investment will also go elsewhere. That's all..

I agree. I am one of these retirees - not a millioanaire (Baht millionaire only!), but at 53 decided to sell up in my home country and retire out here. I bought a house through the company route (normal practise in Thailand - nominees for companies -everyone does it - I was told - even the multi-nationals blah blah blah...). Dont bother flaming me - we all know I am a 'pratt' in some peoples eyes!! However there are a lot of other people like me out there now switching to 30 year leases or Ususfructs or whatever. What a mess !!! who wants the hassle of all that!

What good is a 30 years lease anyway - when I was 20 I never thought I would live to be 50! Now I am 53 I cannot imagine being 80!!

Yet my mum is 87!!! bless her - so I would be booted out of my home when I am 83! Then what??

Lets hope at that age I still have my wits about me and some money in the bank - at least enough for the visa renewal - or I wont have a house NOR will I have a country to live in either!

I would never have bought a house in Thailand if I had better understood the way the Thai authorities would change the way they implemented their laws. I have advised all my chums in the UK and elsewhere to avoid buying property in Thailand.

It seems logical - that now people like me fully understand the thinking of the Thai authorities towards Farang house/land ownership - no more nonsence about land ownership - that we would not want buy a house here.

The Housing market is as bad as it is at last being publicly stated by this thread. This needs to be stated more and more and maybe the FBA will be watered down!

By the way there are now 9 house for re-sale in this estate outside Pattaya. They have come on the market steadily since Jan 2006. Ranging from 3mill to 7million Baht. Only one has been rented out and the rest just sit there empty.

I think you have summed that up very well. I think you might have posted what many are feeling and when you work for so many years to get liquid, you should not have to be worried in your old age about where you going to live..

I would like to know when this 30/30/30 lease will be tested. Does anyone know if anyone has had a lease for 30 years and the next 30 year renewal was passed on free of hassles.. I realize in this 30/30/30 year lease structure, that the next of kin etc has to sign??>.. maybe Im wrong, but please educate me.

We are discussing this here.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=131932

I am no expert believe me, but since last year I have looked into the company structure thing and all the options. I have been offered good advice from the experts here on TV - who I trust more than any other source - and I have been convinced - there is no such thing as a 30+30 year lease that is worth the paper it is printed on.

The 30 year lease also MUST be registered at the Land Office.

If you want tenure beyond 30 years then you need a Usufrct, which allows you to remain in the property until you die. That is another subject though isn't it, with another set of questions not relevant to this thread.

[palm]

My GF dragged me to a Thank You/Update lunchtime party thing in lower Suk on Saturday - for an update on another high quality condo development we bought there (ready in 2 years). It was one of those presentations where they show you the materials and processes being used for construction etc. All high quality, from a Taiwanese firm.

It was jam-PACKED! Standing room only. I'd say at least 99% Thais/Chinese/Japanese - a good mixture of young, not-so-young, and retirees. There were only 2 'white skins' in the audience that I could see. Maybe the supposed all-knowing, all-powerful Western falang is not such a big deal after all?

They all seemed happy and well-healed; maybe they know something about property the $500-a-month falang slum-dweller doesn't?

Edited July 23, 2007 by palm

[klikster]

June of last year we got financing on 2nd hand property with 20% down .. 30 year mortgage. Actually, I wouldn't encourage any economy to loan 100% on property. Just my opinion.

Klikster.

I assume this was a 2nd hand house, not a condo. And since you said 'we' I assume you mean a Thai spouse who got the mortgage in her name since the property would of course be solely in her name?

If it was a condo in your name..that would be interesting to hearn more about.

It was a house. No spouse involved. Thai partner. My name never appeared anywhere except on the mailbox.

[klikster]

Some condos are reselling quite well. Granted, they are pretty new and I have no idea about financing.

My 'nephew' (friend's son) is an architect currently working at the Sheraton project in Cha-am. The project is not even 100% complete and he told me about condos already reselling in the Bt 7 mil and up range.

The villas are reselling in the high teens low twenties. To me, that says they are already sold out. And these places are not on the beach, but behind the hotel property.