![](https://i.imgur.com/CLvY2jA.png")
07-07-2022, 02:31 AM
It’s funny how the tide of Sers has turned. In the past, owners of HDB flats were elated over the news of their units being acquired under Sers as they stood to receive very attractive and favourable rehousing benefits. Being selected for Sers was akin to winning a lottery.
It doesn’t seem to be the case now, what with many owners of Sers flats in AMK facing huge top-up costs for their brand-new replacement units, some of whom were griping about having to cough up a six-figure sum for a similar unit that comes with a fresh 99-year lease. Why have the sers owners suffered a reversal of fortunes this time round?
Well, I don’t think there are cold calculations behind the government’s Sers policies. The most probable explanation is that those flats that had undergone Sers in the past were relatively newer units with longer remaining leases while the AMK flats currently under Sers are much older with 56 years left on their lease, having been built in ‘79.
Coupled with the spiraling costs of building materials and labour, the HDB probably deemed it necessary in some cases for affected owners to top up cash for their replacement units, much to the chagrin of many affected residents.
This cause celebre reminds me of the initial public offerings of yore. Back then investors and speculators would rush to apply for IPOs because prices of those new shares typically would surge on the first day of trading, and the buying frenzy might continue for a few more days before profit-taking set in, giving investors a tidy profit. Little wonder, then, that IPOs were often oversubscribed as investors saw the new offerings as a surefire way to make money.
They say all good things must come to an end. Sure enough IPOs began to lose their lustre after a period of time, resulting in many losing money, at least on paper, when prices of their new shares on trading day went below what they had paid for. Investors then became wary about putting their money into IPOs. The same holds true for HDB dwellers as they remain wary of Sers, judging from the numerous negative comments posted online.
It doesn’t seem to be the case now, what with many owners of Sers flats in AMK facing huge top-up costs for their brand-new replacement units, some of whom were griping about having to cough up a six-figure sum for a similar unit that comes with a fresh 99-year lease. Why have the sers owners suffered a reversal of fortunes this time round?
Well, I don’t think there are cold calculations behind the government’s Sers policies. The most probable explanation is that those flats that had undergone Sers in the past were relatively newer units with longer remaining leases while the AMK flats currently under Sers are much older with 56 years left on their lease, having been built in ‘79.
Coupled with the spiraling costs of building materials and labour, the HDB probably deemed it necessary in some cases for affected owners to top up cash for their replacement units, much to the chagrin of many affected residents.
This cause celebre reminds me of the initial public offerings of yore. Back then investors and speculators would rush to apply for IPOs because prices of those new shares typically would surge on the first day of trading, and the buying frenzy might continue for a few more days before profit-taking set in, giving investors a tidy profit. Little wonder, then, that IPOs were often oversubscribed as investors saw the new offerings as a surefire way to make money.
They say all good things must come to an end. Sure enough IPOs began to lose their lustre after a period of time, resulting in many losing money, at least on paper, when prices of their new shares on trading day went below what they had paid for. Investors then became wary about putting their money into IPOs. The same holds true for HDB dwellers as they remain wary of Sers, judging from the numerous negative comments posted online.
