Poll About Real Estate Company Ownership Crackdown

[Thaiquila]

I was just wondering how people think this is all going to turn out.

I personally think it will all blow over.

[Mobi]

I was just wondering how people think this is all going to turn out.

I personally think it will all blow over.

So do I.

Didn't you vote Thaiquila?

There's two votes and one says yes and one no. So who's the no?

[Thaiquila]

I was just wondering how people think this is all going to turn out.

I personally think it will all blow over.

So do I.

Didn't you vote Thaiquila?

There's two votes and one says yes and one no. So who's the no?

Hi Mobi,

Yes, I am embarassed to admit I cast an accidental NO vote in my own poll! I guess you could call it the Florida Syndrome.

[~G~]

I was just wondering how people think this is all going to turn out.

I personally think it will all blow over.

So do I.

Didn't you vote Thaiquila?

There's two votes and one says yes and one no. So who's the no?

Hi Mobi,

Yes, I am embarassed to admit I cast an accidental NO vote in my own poll! I guess you could call it the Florida Syndrome.

Maybe you'd like it to be YES but deep inside believe in the NO?

[Thaiquila]

Nah, just an oversight influenced by a little too much Zinfandel. Probably the poll question could have been worded a bit better.

I was talking about the companies for people just to own condos or houses, not the people using such companies to do big real estate development. I think these are separate issues that have gotten mixed up in this current mess.

Edited June 6, 2006 by Thaiquila

[~G~]

I was talking about the companies for people just to own condos or houses, not the people using such companies to do big real estate development. I think these are separate issues that have gotten mixed up in this current mess.

I agree that those are separate issues, but can you give a reason for your opinion that it will blow over?

[Thaiquila]

I was talking about the companies for people just to own condos or houses, not the people using such companies to do big real estate development. I think these are separate issues that have gotten mixed up in this current mess.

I agree that those are separate issues, but can you give a reason for your opinion that it will blow over?

Not really, just a gut feeling about the way things work and don't work in Thailand.

The bars close earlier, and yet they don't.

Prostitution is illegal, and yet pervasive.

Foreigners can't own land, and yet they do.

This is the status quo, it is not only foreigners that are going to get hurt if this continues much longer, some Thais will be hurt as well, probably some very powerful ones.

And think about the effect on resort condo development. You can sell the 49 percent share, but without companies how to sell out the 51 percent share?

Away from my gut feeling, there is evidence this really is about cracking down on certain developers, not small owners, so if that is really true, all that needs to happen is for that to be sorted out.

Otherwise, it is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Edited June 6, 2006 by Thaiquila

[~G~]

I was talking about the companies for people just to own condos or houses, not the people using such companies to do big real estate development. I think these are separate issues that have gotten mixed up in this current mess.

I agree that those are separate issues, but can you give a reason for your opinion that it will blow over?

Not really, just a gut feeling about the way things work and don't work in Thailand.

The bars close earlier, and yet they don't.

Prostitution is illegal, and yet pervasive.

Foreigners can't own land, and yet they do.

This is the status quo, it is not only foreigners that are going to get hurt if this continues much longer, some Thais will be hurt as well, probably some very powerful ones.

And think about the effect on resort condo development. You can sell the 49 percent share, but without companies how to sell out the 51 percent share?

Away from my gut feeling, there is evidence this really is about cracking down on certain developers, not small owners, so if that is really true, all that needs to happen is for that to be sorted out.

Otherwise, it is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

I assume the ones with the power are the potential buyers (those Thais who hold their land forever and just looking to accumulate more) and not the sellers. The former might prefer a temporary decline in prices and demand.

[Thaiquila]

Yes, there are winners and losers no matter how this shakes out ...

What I don't personally believe is that this is some kind of grand conspiracy to steal farang property, to me, it just looks like a confusing legal mess.

Of course, I am no expert, and I don't think anybody knows how this is going to shake out.

Even Thaksin wouldn't know, because he doesn't know if he is going to end up PM again, in jail, or in exile in the Caribbean.

I can see that the votes are adding up more pessimistically, so I wonder why people feel that way?

Edited June 6, 2006 by Thaiquila

[alexth]

Us, the farangs, are maybe the only one cracking...I haven't seen many thais being worried about the situation. Not mentioning a big percent of the girls who are just receiving "gifts" from some farangs.

Thais are happy about it, no farangs owning something on their turf, it's their turf and I think they would like to keep it forever. I'm not that happy about that, but that's the way it is and I have a wild guess that it will never change.

Just think how many thais hooked up with farangs in business and maybe their only merit is just being an associate.

I personally think they aren't that hurt about the matter, but again, this is just my opinion.

[Heng]

Fairly ambivalent about it all. In the big scheme of things (say, if you're looking at 50-100 years at a time), this isn't even a ripple in the pond. When a good percentage of foreigners buy, after one generation 'and often less,' the property is back (to local ownership) in the hands of their adopted Thai families. Then one generation after that and again, often in less time, the property is back in the hands of the Thais with the higher savings + investment rates who wield most of the power here. I see it all the time on a microeconomic level - the same cycle happening over the course of just a few years. In the big picture, either way, it's hardly a ripple.