Do Condos In Thailand Last Forever?

[think_too_mut]

A condo building's fate is almost entirely determined by the management team involved - which is determined by the condo owners who elect a board who are responsible for hiring the management company. If you are that worried, get on the board- and no nonsense about non-Thais, two buildings I lived in had Western board members. As the saying goes, you get what you pay for. If you live in a cheap building where the condo owners do not pay reasonable association fees, guess what, the building will fall into disrepair. If you live in a decent building, where the management fees are reasonable, the building will be maintained – no management company is in it for free.

I have lived in a number of buildings, all over 10 years old (one was 15), and I would say only one had management issues - the company lasted one year, but did manage to screw up a few things in the process, especially security. Every other building was constantly undergoing some form of upgrading or testing to make sure everything was functioning. The only caveat I add to this, older buildings have poor wiring, as most never envisioned everyone with a home computer, a washer and dryer unit and large screen TV; so who knows what a building will require 10 years from now.

This is where the girl is coming from:

Twenty buildings in the decades-old flat complex have been marked for demolition. Buildings 1-8 along Din Daeng road, which have 672 units, and buildings 21-32 along Vibhavadi Rangsit road, with 640 units, have all been set for demolition.

The board last year proposed a plan to demolish the flat complex, saying the buildings were no longer safe for residents to stay in.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/18Feb2008_news003.php

[zorro1]

They are a bad investment for her because you can have it in your name.

Bingo!! very clever

[percy2]

<deleted> are you guys talking about...comparing Ameican [and European for that matter] buildings designed and engineered and built by skilled architects, engineers, and QUALIFIED tradesmen using high-quality steel, cement, and finishes.

Here in LOS, the design and engineering (currently) may be up to snuff but the construction supervision, materials, and construction workers (off-season Issan farmers and their wives and children) are definitely questionable.

Even many run of the mill condos in the West need major (and expensive) HVAC and plumbing system upgrades/replacement every 20-30 years.

1. I'm really not sure where this myth of poor quality high rise construction comes from. I'm pretty sure it doesn't come from people who have been involved in the industry here and in the west. There is generally much more attention paid to concrete works in high rise here than in the west.

2. All properties need upkeep. Doesn't matter if its high rise or single story, in Bangkok or London. This is an argument for renting v buying not condo v house.

Cheers

[percy2]

This is where the girl is coming from:

Twenty buildings in the decades-old flat complex have been marked for demolition. Buildings 1-8 along Din Daeng road, which have 672 units, and buildings 21-32 along Vibhavadi Rangsit road, with 640 units, have all been set for demolition.

The board last year proposed a plan to demolish the flat complex, saying the buildings were no longer safe for residents to stay in.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/18Feb2008_news003.php

Have you got a link that works?

I'd be interested which set of buildings they are talking about.

Cheers

[quiksilva]

They could easily last 100 years if they receive basic maintenance. Much longer than Thai partners.

There are many RC buildings around that are already over 100 years old.

The Monolith in NYC is an example built 1905 , with Ingalls Building , Cincinnati 1903 , probably being the first high rise RC building.

<deleted> are you guys talking about...comparing Ameican [and European for that matter] buildings designed and engineered and built by skilled architects, engineers, and QUALIFIED tradesmen using high-quality steel, cement, and finishes.

Here in LOS, the design and engineering (currently) may be up to snuff { quiksilva adds : many buildings here are designed by foreign architects often based in their home countries, USA, Europe etc, they just get a local firm to sign off on their designs} but the construction supervision, materials, and construction workers (off-season Issan farmers and their wives and children) are definitely questionable.

Even many run of the mill condos in the West need major (and expensive) HVAC and plumbing system upgrades/replacement every 20-30 years.

Thats what sinking funds are for. If the condo project you are looking at doesn't have one (or one that is not fully paid up), don't buy it.

[Heng]

...you own the all important dirt (instead of 1/100 of the dirt in a 100 unit condo...

I am no expert but I do not believe the title to a condo gives you "ownership" of the land, it might allow rights of access to a hole in the sky - however the real problem is that a condo can be great on the inside but if the management is bad, does not reinvest, employ poor security, skim the water and electric fees etc etc. you would be living in a bad place with little chance of selling on.

I've never encountered the above situation either, I was saying that even in the best case, that's all you would have a right to (naturally the land dept. probably isn't going to break up the existing chanote into a bunch of lemonade stand sized 'lots' anyway).

[Naam]

With a condo you will find they are all mortar and brick. Homes have some wood in the frame. Big problem here is termites and another kinda insect that eats dam_n near anything. If you plan on being here 360 then I guess you could get a house and take up your spare time killing them little critters. Thats not even putting the girlfriend in the equation. But, I would think if she has already told you condo no good buy house, you really need to put your thinking cap on. Interpretation of GF satement is condo no good for me, house good for me.

= rubbish! except for thai style wooden homes no wood is used for static construction in Thailand, not even for inside walls. even the roof structure is steel.

[think_too_mut]

This is where the girl is coming from:

Twenty buildings in the decades-old flat complex have been marked for demolition. Buildings 1-8 along Din Daeng road, which have 672 units, and buildings 21-32 along Vibhavadi Rangsit road, with 640 units, have all been set for demolition.

The board last year proposed a plan to demolish the flat complex, saying the buildings were no longer safe for residents to stay in.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/18Feb2008_news003.php

Have you got a link that works?

I'd be interested which set of buildings they are talking about.

Cheers

The article is not there any more.

Would not the excerpt give enough details about where the buildings are?

[Irene]

QUOTE (think_too_mut @ 2008-02-19 08:19:51) This is where the girl is coming from:

Twenty buildings in the decades-old flat complex have been marked for demolition. Buildings 1-8 along Din Daeng road, which have 672 units, and buildings 21-32 along Vibhavadi Rangsit road, with 640 units, have all been set for demolition.

The board last year proposed a plan to demolish the flat complex, saying the buildings were no longer safe for residents to stay in.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/18Feb2008_news003.php

Have you got a link that works?

I'd be interested which set of buildings they are talking about.

Cheers

The article is not there any more.

Would not the excerpt give enough details about where the buildings are?

The referred buildings were built 40 years ago by the government housing department to help the lower income group and the poor. It was then built to eradicate slum-dwellers.

I can refer to the first residential condos built for sale to the public, Tai Ping Towers. Both buildings must be over twenty years old and I am still earning rental of 60,000/month for a 250sqm (four bedrooms) flat.

I can also refer to the four-floor buildings along the Rajdamnoen Avenue which were built sometimes in 1930 and they are still ever strong and nice to look at and people are still working there.

I can also refer to the tallest building in 1950 with nine floors in Chinatown area. The building is still standing there but somewhat dilapidated.

I can also refer to most of the shophouses in the Ratanakosin area which were all built pre-Second WW and people are still trading and living there.

Need I find more?

[cclub75]

The article is not there any more.

Would not the excerpt give enough details about where the buildings are?

It's because the stupid BKK Post changes the URL of all its links, the day after !...

When the article is published :

http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/18Feb2008_news003.php

And the same article, but the day after....

http://www.bangkokpost.com/180208_News/18Feb2008_news003.php

In 2008, it defies any logic to do that. For instance, Google (and many other websites) will index the daily URLs.... that will be changed the day after. Therefore, broken links, people unable to access the pages...

Edited February 19, 2008 by cclub75

[Abrak]

Getting back to the topic of whether it is better to own a house or a condo.

If you look at historic returns (and bear in mind that historic returns may not be a good indicator of future returns) you will find that the best returns have been made in Thailand by owning land. This is the key fixed resource and good plots of land have made between good to spectacular returns over the last 20 years whether it be in Bangkok or prime beachland in say Phuket.

This has translated into houses (which have land) being better investments than condos in general. Although investing in pure land would have done better.

Condos have generally been very poor investments. While someone like Irene might have done ok by doing her homework and investing wisely the average investor has done poorly. It is like the SET, I am sure some people have made money but you cant escape the reality that the market peaked at twice the current level 14 years ago.

[percy2]

Getting back to the topic of whether it is better to own a house or a condo.

If you look at historic returns (and bear in mind that historic returns may not be a good indicator of future returns) you will find that the best returns have been made in Thailand by owning land. This is the key fixed resource and good plots of land have made between good to spectacular returns over the last 20 years whether it be in Bangkok or prime beachland in say Phuket.

This has translated into houses (which have land) being better investments than condos in general. Although investing in pure land would have done better.

Condos have generally been very poor investments. While someone like Irene might have done ok by doing her homework and investing wisely the average investor has done poorly. It is like the SET, I am sure some people have made money but you cant escape the reality that the market peaked at twice the current level 14 years ago.

I'd say that that is true for Thai citizens but not necessarily so for non-citizens.

Cheers

[percy2]

The article is not there any more.

Would not the excerpt give enough details about where the buildings are?

It's because the stupid BKK Post changes the URL of all its links, the day after !...

When the article is published :

http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/18Feb2008_news003.php

And the same article, but the day after....

http://www.bangkokpost.com/180208_News/18Feb2008_news003.php

In 2008, it defies any logic to do that. For instance, Google (and many other websites) will index the daily URLs.... that will be changed the day after. Therefore, broken links, people unable to access the pages...

Thanks

[Jandajoy]

My girlfriend told me I should buy a house in BKK and not a condo. I know if I buy a house that I can put it in here name and have her sign over the right for me to live in the house for the rest of my life so I'm okay with buying a house, BUT with regards to condos. She tells me that they only last 10-20 years then they fall apart. Is this true? She maybe talking about the older or inexpensive ones. What is the lifespan of a condo in BKK?

I find it hard to believe that condos don't last forever, but then again I am a farang and am not familar with the quality of condos in Thailand.

Any insight would be good. I'm curious.....

ps don't laugh too hard at my naiveness

How could you know if they've lasted forever?

[Abrak]

Getting back to the topic of whether it is better to own a house or a condo.

If you look at historic returns (and bear in mind that historic returns may not be a good indicator of future returns) you will find that the best returns have been made in Thailand by owning land. This is the key fixed resource and good plots of land have made between good to spectacular returns over the last 20 years whether it be in Bangkok or prime beachland in say Phuket.

This has translated into houses (which have land) being better investments than condos in general. Although investing in pure land would have done better.

Condos have generally been very poor investments. While someone like Irene might have done ok by doing her homework and investing wisely the average investor has done poorly. It is like the SET, I am sure some people have made money but you cant escape the reality that the market peaked at twice the current level 14 years ago.

I'd say that that is true for Thai citizens but not necessarily so for non-citizens.

Cheers

It really isnt that difficult to own land here as a foreigner if that is what you want to do (although I have never done it myself.) There are various structures.

Sitting on land and waiting for it to appreciate is a very boring way of making money though.

[percy2]

It really isnt that difficult to own land here as a foreigner if that is what you want to do (although I have never done it myself.) There are various structures.

Sitting on land and waiting for it to appreciate is a very boring way of making money though.

What percentage would you guess do find it difficult and end up losing "their" property.

You have to factor this in to working out the best return , surely.

Cheers

[Abrak]

It really isnt that difficult to own land here as a foreigner if that is what you want to do (although I have never done it myself.) There are various structures.

Sitting on land and waiting for it to appreciate is a very boring way of making money though.

What percentage would you guess do find it difficult and end up losing "their" property.

You have to factor this in to working out the best return , surely.

Cheers

I am not 100% sure I know what you are getting at....

If you mean how many people do I know who have bought land in say their wife's name and then ended up losing it as their relationship ended, I would say quite a few.

As to people who have set up a proper legal structure - say a Thai company to own the land - I have never known anyone to run into trouble yet.

But, to be honest, I am not advocating speculating in land investment here (merely pointing put the high returns in the past). Putting land in your wife's/gfs name seems an odd road to go down. Other routes require a lot of effort. I own houses here because ownership itself brings rewards - I like to live in my own home. Investing in land might be more remunerative but it is certainly dull.

[j0hnga1t]

Wow, lots of information here. I'm not looking to invest in land. I'm looking into a place where I can retire and eventually settle down with my girlfriend who will hopefully be my wife someday. The good thing about buying a house is that if it goes bad, I can build a new one. If a condo goes bad, I'm hosed....People mention bad management companies and inadequate sinking funds, poor quality construction....being Asian, I can say it's not about good quality, it's all about bottomline. In American, there are some remedies and the legal system is more sympathetic, but in Thailand?????? I have no clue, but I would think it would be buyer beware.

I just expect a place to last my lifetime (I'm 45 now) and I plan to move to Thailand in six years (early retirement from the gov't). To me it's not about whether to trust my girlfriend or not, I do trust her. We met on Saipan in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. We developed a friendship there over a one year period. It later developed into more. It's about what to buy. I prefer a condo since it's less of a headache, but how do you know if the management company is good?

REGARDING CONDOS, here in the US they have clauses where the HOA can raise rate if they need major repairs like a new roof or other expensive items. Is it like that in Thailand? Who are the good developers and management companies???? I have plenty of time to decide...Thanks again for all your input up to this point.

[pkrv]

j0hnga1t - you are a newbee. Just like any other market on the face of the planet there are good deals and bad deals. Thailand is no exception. Just like any other market anywhere research. I can certainly vouch that you can get alot of prime (condominium) property for your money.

Your choice on House or Condominium ownership - There is/are tons and tons and tons of information and informed comment on this site (once you can wade through the 'drivel').

Oddly Thailand has a legal system. It appears to be that those who try to bypass it have the most difficulties...

On Condominium rates these are just like elsewhere else determined by the owners, often freehold owners. Those who vote themselves down the toilet for a few baht probably live in a place that cost a few baht. Most people are rational and for some unaccountable reason wish to protect their investment.

If you have time to invest simply follow this forum you will quickly work out what you wish to do.

Edited February 20, 2008 by pkrv

[MaiChai]

Renting is the smart thing to do before buying. You can learn alot and avoid all the pitfalls. I own a house up country, and have been renting an apartment in BKK for 3 years now. I have just moved to a rented house in BKK and am glad to see the back of the apartment. Here is why:

• No noisy neighbours (well they are not as close).
  
• Management telling what you can and cant do.
  
• Nosy security asking what you are doing all the time (ie if I am fiddling with my motorbike).
  
• Lifts breaking down.
  
• Less people living around me.
  
• My pickup not being rolled about by the security/bumped by other cars/scratched by people walking by.
  
• Generally more space and room in the house.
  
• More residential area with normal people/quieter/less crouded.
  
• More privacy and freedom to do as I wish.
  

Condos are a big risk and will deteriorate. Thais dont refurb buildings so figure they will tear it down in 20/30 years and then you get into the legal problems of what happens with your 1/100 share of the property.

My view is to buy an old house in the suburbs; the trick is to get the land ownership; the quality of the property is a lesser issue. Preferably with reasonable transport (maybe a 10 min bus ride to the BTS/MRT). You can always renovate/rebuild an old house; labor and materials are quite cheap in reality.

If you are new to Thailand/Bangkok then the best thing to do is rent and see if the gf sticks with you or goes gold digging elsewhere

Renting=low risk/cheap/easy.

[Jingthing]

REGARDING CONDOS, here in the US they have clauses where the HOA can raise rate if they need major repairs like a new roof or other expensive items.

Yes, of course, it is the same. Who else do you think will pay for major repairs, the tooth fairy?

[Irene]

My girlfriend told me I should buy a house in BKK and not a condo. I know if I buy a house that I can put it in here name and have her sign over the right for me to live in the house for the rest of my life so I'm okay with buying a house, BUT with regards to condos. She tells me that they only last 10-20 years then they fall apart. Is this true? She maybe talking about the older or inexpensive ones. What is the lifespan of a condo in BKK?

I find it hard to believe that condos don't last forever, but then again I am a farang and am not familar with the quality of condos in Thailand.

Any insight would be good. I'm curious.....

ps don't laugh too hard at my naiveness

MaiChai,

I have been living in a condo for 35 years and come down to the ground two years ago. My comments are in bold type:

Renting is the smart thing to do before buying. You can learn alot and avoid all the pitfalls. Absolutely correct. I own a house up country, and have been renting an apartment in BKK for 3 years now. I have just moved to a rented house in BKK and am glad to see the back of the apartment. Here is why:

• No noisy neighbours (well they are not as close).
  
• Management telling what you can and cant do.
  
• Nosy security asking what you are doing all the time (ie if I am fiddling with my motorbike).
  
• Lifts breaking down.
  
• Less people living around me.
  
• My pickup not being rolled about by the security/bumped by other cars/scratched by people walking by.
  
• Generally more space and room in the house.
  
• More residential area with normal people/quieter/less crouded.
  
• More privacy and freedom to do as I wish.
  The above are somewhat personal. I did not find all the annoyances that bad. I moved down because of the earthquake on the boxing day shook the building one hour before affecting Phuket and Khao Lak. At my quiet moment, I sometimes long for residence in a flat. But on the whole, coming down to the ground has been an eye-opening especially when hearing birds chirping away. The only complaint I have is some little things go wrong all the time and the running of water pumps. There is no perfect solution to either.
  

Condos are a big risk and will deteriorate. Thais dont refurb buildings so figure they will tear it down in 20/30 years and then you get into the legal problems of what happens with your 1/100 share of the property. Not in all cases. (I have not heard of one yet except for the government housing condos which were poorly built 40 years ago). One condo we own has an age of 25 years old and recently installed new lifts and can still fetch rental of 60,000/month. (Tai Ping Towers). Legal problem? Unlikely because whatever you do you need 75% agreement from co-owners of what to do next. At that stage, democratic rules come to play. If the whole building caught fire or collapsed due to earthquake and uninhabitable, knock-down is definitely a must and compensation from insurance companies is expected. Or alternatively, co-owners take the money and sell land for eventual distributions to co-owners instead of using the fund to rebuild. (So, you could ask the management whether the sum is well-covered for each unitholder.

My view is to buy an old house in the suburbs; the trick is to get the land ownership; the quality of the property is a lesser issue. Preferably with reasonable transport (maybe a 10 min bus ride to the BTS/MRT). You can always renovate/rebuild an old house; labor and materials are quite cheap in reality. It is a question of preference. I would hate supervising house building or even repairs. Close supervision is always a must.

If you are new to Thailand/Bangkok then the best thing to do is rent and see if the gf sticks with you or goes gold digging elsewhere Definitely, never go by the romantic idea of Thailand and gf. Always hum to yourself that Thailand is not England, whatever you thought happens in England do not also happen in Thailand. Remember Thailand has never been colonised and quaintnesses are everywhere. You might feel somewhat at home in Malaysia, Singapore or Hong Kong.

Renting=low risk/cheap/easy. Absolutely and plenty of supplies if you are not in the high-end category.

[ray08]

My view is to buy an old house in the suburbs; the trick is to get the land ownership; the quality of the property is a lesser issue. Preferably with reasonable transport (maybe a 10 min bus ride to the BTS/MRT). You can always renovate/rebuild an old house; labor and materials are quite cheap in reality. It is a question of preference. I would hate supervising house building or even repairs. Close supervision is always a must.

Renting=low risk/cheap/easy. Absolutely and plenty of supplies if you are not in the high-end category.

Even thougth i am not a fan of the bangkok Condo market ,i would not hesistate in buying a free standing house in Bangkok, they are great value , the trick about land ownership is just too hard , my wife is european , and company route is just too complicated and technically illegal , all we need is another non elected government in to crack down on companies and could create real nightmares ,imagine if they make you sell , bet your life it would be a fire sale

I too am now looking to move from Condo to Renting a house ,a bit pricey in my Sathorn area, but will put in some lowball offers and see if some of these new 1 year empty houses can come down in price,

As for putting a property in Thai GF name , great idea , as long as she is the one buying and paying for it , anything else and you just become another of the 99% of Ferang who cry about being ripped off by Thai GF/Wife ,

as Kerry Packer said "play with gorillars and you going to get beat up"

Ps ; Not saying the girls resemble gorillars

[backflip]

A condo will last a lot longer than the relationship.

[thaigene2]

Even thougth i am not a fan of the bangkok Condo market ,i would not hesistate in buying a free standing house in Bangkok, they are great value , the trick about land ownership is just too hard ,

That's why they're 'great value' I reckon..if it was possible for foreigners to obtain freeholds the prices would shoot up in some (but of course not all) areas.

[backflip]

"if it was possible for foreigners to obtain freeholds the prices would shoot up..."

Exactly, and that's why the government prevents foreigners from owning property directly.

[MoodaengHK]

Hi guys, I have not posted here before but this House Vs Condo tread is an interesting topic and is quite one sided so far. Poor OP grifriend !

People posting here are 1) farangs 2) very focused on condos 2) consider properties in the CBD area only. This is definitely not representative of the market. It also seems a majority of the posters do not have kids, which make their views even more biased.

First, when you talk about houses, you have to move outside of Silom, Sathorn and Sukhumvit, unless you are super rich (or like super small houses ). Actually, most Thais I know would not live there with their families even if they had the choice. Traffic, pollution, low number of schools, in your face naughty nightlife…etc the list is long.There are tons of areas where you get a better quality of life for a family, which are easy to access and even farang compatible (that is another discussion).

A house is not the best choice for singles, those not living in BKK all year round ( lot of “kamoi” if you leave the house unoccupied), those going out very frequently and wanting to be right in the middle of the action with a farang dominated environment. I believe this description fits many on this board, and maybe the majority of farangs in Bangkok . However, it is definitely not applicable to Thais, who are the ones driving the market for houses. Houses have the preference of most Thais. Condos are a fashion and lifestyle statement for a happy-few, and a speculation market for others.

The young executives who are buying 1-2m bahts "shoebox" condos will eventually move to houses when they start having kids or can afford it. Also middle-class thais are pushed out of the CBD condo market by skyrocketing prices driven by farangs and speculators. If you are outside of CBD, why bother for a condo if a house is better and likely cheaper?

As others said, when you buy a house, once the building is fully depreciated, you still have the land. You are free to build a new house whenever you want, no votes or majority issues. Much less risk on quality of management too, because you are the one in control! You can renovate your condo, but need to rely on others for the common areas and main stucture. Take also into consideration that tearing down a condo is not a cheap and easy task.

When you buy a new condo, you are paying for the developer’s (fat) margin. I personally consider that the actual value of the condo is the selling price minus the developers’ margin. So the day you take possession of your condo, you are already at loss. This also tells you why the secondary market is so illiquid: nobody wants to sell for the fair value and the market is just blocked. I have an expereicne of selling a second hand condo, and that was a real eye opener.

In the long run (20+ years) I see houses to be a better investment than condos, because eventually the real estate market is driven by local demand, and will even more so when it matures. Foreigners are a volatile crowd, which come and go. Who knows if HoChi Min is not going to attract a big chunk of Bangkok based foreigners in a few years ?

Yes, farangs have the ownership issue. But this is a personal issue, not relevant to estimate which market will better perform. To conclude: the girlfriend is right, from her perspective.

Edited March 1, 2008 by MoodaengHK

[Irene]

MoodaengHK,

An excellent analysis. However, I have the following commend in blue:

Hi guys, I have not posted here before but this House Vs Condo tread is an interesting topic and is quite one sided so far. Poor OP grifriend ! Welcome! Refreshing to read.

People posting here are 1) farangs 2) very focused on condos 2) consider properties in the CBD area only. This is definitely not representative of the market. It also seems a majority of the posters do not have kids, which make their views even more biased. That is correct but property investment is not decided on an average viewpoint held by majority but preference of each individual sector. The OP's gf is the common opinion of the average Thais but OP's position is different from the average Thai.

First, when you talk about houses, you have to move outside of Silom, Sathorn and Sukhumvit, unless you are super rich (or like super small houses ). Actually, most Thais I know would not live there with their families even if they had the choice. Traffic, pollution, low number of schools, in your face naughty nightlife…etc the list is long.There are tons of areas where you get a better quality of life for a family, which are easy to access and even farang compatible (that is another discussion). Again you are right, most Thais view the situation that way.

A house is not the best choice for singles, those not living in BKK all year round ( lot of "kamoi" if you leave the house unoccupied), those going out very frequently and wanting to be right in the middle of the action with a farang dominated environment. I believe this description fits many on this board, and maybe the majority of farangs in Bangkok . However, it is definitely not applicable to Thais, who are the ones driving the market for houses. Houses have the preference of most Thais. Condos are a fashion and lifestyle statement for a happy-few, and a speculation market for others. That is correct.

The young executives who are buying 1-2m bahts "shoebox" condos will eventually move to houses when they start having kids or can afford it. Also middle-class thais are pushed out of the CBD condo market by skyrocketing prices driven by farangs and speculators. If you are outside of CBD, why bother for a condo if a house is better and likely cheaper? Absolutely correct. Hence, when I buy a condo, I don't go for an average condo but I will go for the best in term of location and better chance of higher premium thereafter because of the niche market.

As others said, when you buy a house, once the building is fully depreciated, you still have the land. You are free to build a new house whenever you want, no votes or majority issues. Much less risk on quality of management too, because you are the one in control! You can renovate your condo, but need to rely on others for the common areas and main stucture. Take also into consideration that tearing down a condo is not a cheap and easy task. Condo owners still have the right to the land, though very very small fraction of the total but the price in the CBD should be at a high premium just like Bond Street in London to compensate for a smaller portion. Some taxi-drivers own acres of land in Mookdaharn of the size of a football field, they are still poor.

When you buy a new condo, you are paying for the developer's (fat) margin. I personally consider that the actual value of the condo is the selling price minus the developers' margin. So the day you take possession of your condo, you are already at loss. A strange way of looking on an investment. With that measurement, you would not invest much unless a seller sell at a loss! I invest because I think in future there will be a buyer prepared to buy higher than my current cost. I am not concerned with how much profit the current seller has made from me. I am concerned with the price that a buyer is prepared to pay in a few years time. This also tells you why the secondary market is so illiquid: nobody wants to sell for the fair value and the market is just blocked. I have an expereicne of selling a second hand condo, and that was a real eye opener. That also applies to a house. Thais dislike buying a second-hand house. It is far worse for a house than a condo since a house is not freely salable to foreigners while condos can be sold to both sectors, foreigners are more willing to buy a secondhand unit.

In the long run (20+ years) I see houses to be a better investment than condos, because eventually the real estate market is driven by local demand, and will even more so when it matures. This is a generalised statement but property is not a homogenous commodity. It is a niche market that location plays a bigger part than reading of the general trend of the public. Foreigners are a volatile crowd, which come and go. Who knows if HoChi Min is not going to attract a big chunk of Bangkok based foreigners in a few years ? I cannot see how foreigners in Thailand dwindling down under well-grained capitalist society. The example of Vietnam is not good now. Stock index has come down immensely and their export would be affected significantly becaue of almost exclusive exports to the US while Thailand relies on the US market of only 16% of her total exports.

Yes, farangs have the ownership issue. But this is a personal issue, not relevant to estimate which market will better perform. It is relevant because there is no free demand for farangs to buy houses and Thais dislike secondhand houses while farangs can buy freely condos (especially when the 30% imposition has now been lifted).To conclude: the girlfriend is right, from her perspective. Nobody can be right or wrong. It has to be judged on personal preference and personal strategy. Whatever choice taken, the judgment has to be made on one issue of the potential growth and stable life of a farang. Like many who have said it, why go for a house when you have a chance, (no matter how small it is) to be kicked out of a house that is in gf's name while a condo can be in a farang's name, in which farang's ownership is supreme and unchallengeable.

[kanderson]

Your girlfriend's claim that Condo fall apart in 10-20 years is clearly untrue.

Is it that clear?

View Talay 1 in Pattaya (I call it that, I never came very close, could be something else but size and style made me call it View Talay 1, when driving from Lotus it's to the right before that T-intersection with Theprassit rd) looks like it is falling apart. Looks like a dump. It's about 20 years old?

Good buildings in BKK have been around for less than that, they should last 50+ but regular run of the mill turn into slums after 20 years or less.

I have owned a Unit at View Talay 1B for years - near Pattaya. I like it better than other locations I could afford at the time. The Pool - and food at the Pool is really nice. Also I like the people around there. I checked other locations like View Talay 2 - not nearly as much fun -I like really really nice swimming pools. You have to live there for awhile I guess.

I certainly don't see the place falling apart. Out biggest expence is Pool maintanence. Condo's are less expensive at View Talay 1A or B - for me it was the best value I could find - a few years ago. I rented there before I bought one. I doubt it's going to fall over or something. It's a nice place to live or vacation.

I have lived in in Hawaii for 20 years and still - the pool and living conditions at View Talay 1 are something I look forward too every year. I plan to retire there - or nearby. I like the value.

I pay 2,000 Baht maintainence fee per year. It's not for everyone - but I like it.

I think Condo's near the Ocean are more risky - with Global warming.