Singapore Property More (Land)-Bank For Buck - DBS Bank
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
53
SECTOR BRIEFING
number
DBS Asian Insights
DBS Group Research • November 2017
Singapore Property
More (Land)-Bank For Buck
DBS Asian Insights SECTOR BRIEFING 53 02 Singapore Property More (Land)-Bank For Buck Derek TAN Equity Analyst derektan@dbs.com Mervin SONG, CFA Equity Analyst mervinsong@dbs.com Rachel TAN Equity Analyst racheltanlr@dbs.com Singapore Research Team equityresearch@dbs.com Produced by: Asian Insights Office • DBS Group Research go.dbs.com/research @dbsinsights asianinsights@dbs.com Goh Chien Yen Editor-in-Chief Jean Chua Managing Editor Geraldine Tan Editor Martin Tacchi Art Director
DBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
03
04 Executive Summary
05 Sustainable Volume Growth To
Lead Recovery In Prices
Wild Card: Prices Will Rise Further
When Foreign Interest Returns
16 Land-Banking – Going All Out
To Win
Developers Pricing In Rise In Launch
Prices
What Should Developers Do?
27 Offices: On the Cusp of a
Multi-Year Recovery
Demand To Remain Robust
Demand For Physical Real Estate
To Continue
DBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
04
Executive Summary
T
Gain of 6-10%? he time has come. Recent market indicators point toward a property market
inflection in 2017 and an eventual rise in property prices from 2018 onwards.
1H17 total property sales have increased 46% y-o-y and if the sales momentum
continues, volumes will reach a five-year peak. In our analysis, we found that 94%
of home buyers in 1H17 are Singaporean households. A wildcard to a further acceleration
in price is when the wave of buying from foreigners return, especially for homes in the Core
Central region.
Market absorption rate Supporting a rise in the property price – unsold inventories are at 16-year lows at 29k
units. When compared against current transaction levels, we found that market absorption
rate (ratio of unsold units and new sales) stands at 2.1x and it is the tightest in the suburb
(Outside Central region). Even if we were to include the more than 3k unlaunched new
units from the recent government land sales (GLS) and en-blocs, we believe the market can
absorb them easily.
Potential S$1.4bn Assuming developers achieve a 10% profit margin on their projects, that could translate
in profits to an internal rate of return (IRR) of 9% but returns could be as high as 40% if pre-sales
do well. As such, we expect developers to come out in force to bid for residential land and
expect prices to continue inching higher in 2H17.
Office sector to Limited commercial sites and the gradual turnaround in office sector has prompted robust
improve in 2018 bids for commercial sites and transactions of Grade A office buildings at compressed yields,
pushing returns closer to 3.0% level, one of the tightest we have seen in recent times. This
supports our thesis that office REITs (which are trading at a P/NAV of 0.8x-0.9x) are cheap
and trading below replacement costs. Expectations of robust bids for upcoming commercial
GLS will reiterate our belief that office REITs (such as CapitaLand Commercial Trust and
Keppel REIT offer good value for investors.
Economic environment Demand for property is typically driven by buyers’ perception of job security and income
growth. At this moment, our economist projects the Singapore economy to still grow
steadily in 2018, while unemployment rate has turned the corner.
Will the government While we do not envision a change in current policy stance by the government, a faster-
tighten? than-projected rise in property prices could result in the government raising the number of
land sites in 2018 and thus taper some of the enthusiasm seen in the land tenders.DBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
05
Sustainable Volume Growth
To Lead Recovery In Prices
T
Sales volume to hit he lift in sentiment following the government’s move to relax property measures
five-year high at the beginning of the year led to strong sales volume in 1H17, up 46% y-o-y. If
the sales momentum holds, annualised 2017 total sales (primary and secondary)
could reach 29,000 units, which would be the highest since volumes peaked in
2012. It has surpassed the historical average of 22,000 units and is 68% of the historical
high of 42,000 units recorded in 2012. The sales volume was largely led by primary sales
(1H17: +52% y-o-y). Similarly, secondary sales showed strong growth (+39% y-o-y) but at
a smaller quantum compared to primary sales.
Contrary to popular belief that sales only rebounded after the relaxation of property
measures, we note that sales volume had rebounded in FY16. FY16 sales grew 20%
to 21,000 units, close to the historical average, and FY16 primary sales of 12,000 units
surpassed the historical average of 11,000 units.
Take-up rates The take-up rates within the month of new launches increased to 41% in 2016 and hit a
high of 47% in 1H17 from the low of 29% in 2015, implying a pickup in interest for new
property launches.
Diagram 1: 2017 annualised sales volume has surpassed the historical average
Source: URA, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
06
Strong sales momentum Despite the numerous headlines about strong sales of new launches, sales from new
in unsold inventory launches in 1H17 only comprised 23% of primary sales vs the peak of 72% in 2011 and
2008. This means that the strong sales momentum was from previous launches.
No recovery in prices Historically, sales volume tends to lead property prices movement by two to three quarters.
Despite sales volume having bottomed in FY15, PPI has yet to bottom and continues to
decrease from its peak in FY13, though the decline has started to moderate since 4Q16. We
believe the recovery in property prices is imminent, with sustainable robust sales volume.
Diagram 2: Sales volume leads prices by 2-3 quarters
Volume PPI bottomed No. of Q Volume PPI changes
bottomed / / peaked before PPI changes after one year
peaked turns
3Q03 1Q04 2 11% 2%
3Q07 2Q08 3 -47% -25%
4Q08 2Q09 2 47% 38%
4Q12 3Q13 3 -25% -4%
1Q15 Yet to turn 9* 74%* -6%*
Source: URA, DBS Bank
* volumes increased and PPI decrease from 1Q15 to-date (2Q17)
Diagram 3: 2017 annualised primary sales volume has surpassed the historical average
Source: URA, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
07
Diagram 4: 2017 annualised secondary sales volume close to historical average
Source: URA, DBS Bank
Wild Card: Prices Will Rise Further When
Foreign Interest Returns
Significant rise Although 1H17 foreign buying volumes rose 49% y-o-y (largely in the secondary market;
1H17: +69% y-o-y), the proportion of foreign buying remains low at 6%, below the historical
average of 9%. The historical peak was 19% in 2011 when foreign buying volumes peaked
at 5.7k units. Majority of buyers hail from China, comprising 28% of total sales and up 33%
y-o-y in 1H17. Malaysian and Indonesian buyers slumped 44% and 34%, respectively, while
Indian buyers soared 88%.
Will foreign interest When the Singapore property market went through a period of lacklustre demand due
return? to a series of tightening measures implemented prior to 2013, foreign buyers flocked to
major cities such as Hong Kong, Sydney, Melbourne and Vancouver in droves, causing
prices to rise.
Hence, these cities recently started implementing aggressive cooling measures such as
raising stamp duties to curb a potential overheating in their property markets. The hike in
stamp duties have now brought the cost of buying in these markets to comparable levels.
For example, taxes / stamp duties for foreign buyers in Hong Kong could be up to 30%,
Canada has raised it to 15%, and Australia has doubled its rates. These rates now look
more comparable to Singapore’s buyer stamp duty of up to 18% for foreigners.DBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
8
Singapore’s property remains attractive to foreign buyers given its strong and stable currency.
As such, we believe foreign interest may return to Singapore now that sentiment has turned
and local demand has seen strong growth. If foreign interest continues to rise, we believe
this may boost demand which could lead to a quicker and stronger-than-expected recovery
akin to what we saw in 2009 to 2011. However, the caveat to a weaker-than-expected
recovery in foreign interest would be capital restrictions from their home countries.
Diagram 5: Sales largely driven by local demand; foreign buying still low
Source: URA, DBS Bank
Diagram 6: Foreign buying remains low despite recording 49% growth y-o-y in 1H17
Source: URA, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
9
Diagram 7: Property measures in major cities
Country City/Region Stamp Duties / taxes Loan-to-value Additional measures
Australia NSW Foreign Investor Surcharge Duty: 8% Offshore foreigners: 50% cap on
(from 4% previously) effective 1 July max 70% foreign ownership
2017 for new property
developments
Annual land tax surcharge: 2% (0.75% Onshore foreigners:
previously) 80-90%
Victoria Additional stamp duty for foreign Offshore foreigners:
buyers: 7% (from 3% previously) max 70%
effective 1 July 2016
Annual land tax surcharge: 1.5% (0.5% Onshore foreigners:
previously) 80-90%
Canada Vancouver Foreign buyers will be taxed at 15%, Empty homes tax:
exempted on pre-sale purchases 1%
Toronto Non-Resident Speculation Tax: 15% in
the Great Golden Horseshoe region
China Hong Ad Valorem Tax - step-up rates range < HK$10m: 50% Risk-weighted
Kong from 1.5-8.5% for first-time buyers; flat mortgage loans at
rate 15% for non-first time buyers (>1 25%
property)
Buyers’ stamp duty: 15% for non-HK PR > HK$10m: 40%
buyers
Special stamp duty (SSD): 10% (sold Corporates: 40%
within third year of purchase) to 20%
(sold within six months of purchase)
Beijing Loan-to-value (LTV) –
60-65% for first-home
purchase
70% for subsequent
home purchases
Shenzhen LTV – 50-70% for first-
home purchase
30% for subsequent
home purchases
Guangzhou LTV - 30% for
subsequent home
purchases
UK London Step-up rates range between 2-12% for
owner-occupied property
5-15% for investment property
Surcharge of 3% if buyer owns another
property anywhere in the world
Source: Media reports, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
10
Unsold inventory at its lowest since 2001
Unsold inventory at 16- Unsold inventory stood at 29,000 units as of 1Q17, the lowest in 16 years, following the
year low supply restriction in the past two years. After the implementation of the cooling measures,
the government restricted new supply, reducing the number of residential units from the
GLS list to 7.4k units in 2016 from the peak of 14.3k units in 2011.
Potential undersupply? Despite falling demand, the contraction of supply in the market has reduced the absorption
rate (number of years to sell all unsold inventory) from a high of five years to 2.1 years as
at 1Q17. The low absorption rate raises a potential near-term undersupply issue against
current transaction levels.
While sales volume and market sentiment are the more common drivers to property
prices, historically, we saw property prices rise when absorption rates are below four years.
We believe the three- to four-year time period is critical as this is the typical timeframe
to construct a new residential development in which the developer receives progressive
payments from home buyers. However, we note that the recent low absorption rate has yet
to be translated into increasing property prices though the decline in property prices have
moderated in the past 2-3 quarters.
Outside Central Region Based on the unsold inventory and absorption rate, OCR and RCR appear to be the most
and Rest of Central undersupplied with absorption rate at one year and 1.9 years, respectively, while CCR
Region appears to have more room at 10 years’ absorption rate.
Diagram 8: Unsold inventory at 16-year low; absorption rate at its lowest of 1.5 years
as at FY17E
Source: URA, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
11
Diagram 9: Low inventory levels (absorption rateDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
12
Diagram 12: RCR region
Source: URA, DBS Bank
Diagram 13: RCR region
Source: URA, DBS Bank
Diagram 14: OCR region
Source: URA, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
13
Diagram 15: OCR region
Source: URA, DBS Bank
Influx of supply To capitalise on the positive sentiment, developers are now competing for opportunities
to replenish their landbank either via government land tenders, en-bloc or M&A
opportunities. In the 2H17 GLS list released recently, the government injected more
supply (+9% h-o-h) to slightly more than 8,000 residential units. En-bloc transactions
have increased since last year, with 12 deals inked to-date from zero between 2012-2015.
Based on GLS and en-bloc transactions to-date, we estimate that new supply from these
segments could increase to 11,000 units in 2017E and grow at 26% and 28% in 2018E
and 2019E, respectively.
In addition to the primary market, the secondary market could see another influx of
supply as the seller stamp duty (SSD) period on new primary sales made in 2012 (where
sales volume hit a historical high of 27,000 units) has expired in 2016.
Can the sales velocity be Concerns are rising over the market’s ability to absorb the influx in supply over the next 1-2
maintained? years. Given the undersupply situation as shown above, we believe the market is capable
of absorbing the increase in supply even if sales volume were to fall back to 2016 levels.
Based on our sensitivity analysis of potential increase in new supply and the annualised
2017E sales volume (figure 19), the absorption rate would fall to 1.3-1.5 years in the
next three years. For scenario 1, we assume sales volume to decline back to 2016 levels
(assuming the optimism in 2017 is short-lived) and the absorption rate, despite the increase
to 2.7-3.3 years, is still below four years. Scenario 2 assumes that sales volume declines
marginally to halfway between 2016 and 2017’s sales volume, and the absorption rate
is 1.9-2 years. Hence, we believe the increase in supply can be absorbed by the market
against current demand levels.DBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
14
Diagram 16: Estimated new supply from GLS and en-bloc sales
Source: URA, DBS Bank
Remarks
Key Assumptions:
• 2017E GLS supply is based on sites awarded / launched year-to-date, 2H17 GLS confirmed list and half of 2H17 GLS reserve list
• 2018E / 2019E GLS supply is based on a 20% increase from 2017E GLS sites
• 2017E en-bloc supply is based on en-bloc sites in 2016
• 2018E en-bloc supply is based on 1H17 en-bloc sites
• 2019E en-bloc supply assumes 20% increase in 2018E en-bloc supply and 2H17 en-bloc sites (total +57%)
Diagram 17: Sensitivity analysis if supply can be absorbed – Base case
Base case: Assume annualised 2017E 2016 2017E 2018E 2019E % increase
sales sustainable in 2018E/2019E
Total sales (based on annualised 2017E) 20,377 28,900 28,900 28,900 42%
Primary sales 11,971 17,712 17,712 17,712 48%
Secondary sales 8,406 11,188 11,188 11,188 33%
Unsold inventory (total) 41,143 37,631 30,808 27,957
Unsold inventory (primary) 33,191 26,533 22,708 22,829
Est. new supply in secondary market 7,952 11,099 8,101 5,129
(assume 50% of previous new sales)
Est. new supply in primary market 11,054 13,887 17,833
(as per figure 18)
% increase 154% 26% 28%
Absorption rate (total) 2.0 1.3 1.1 1.0
Absorption rate (primary) 2.8 1.5 1.3 1.3
Source: URA, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
15
Diagram 18: Sensitivity analysis if supply can be absorbed – Scenario 1
Scenario 1: 2016 2017E 2018E 2019E % increase
Assume sales falls to 2016 levels
Scenario 1: Assume sales falls to 2016 2016 2017E 2018E 2019E % increase
levels
Total sales 20,377 20,377 20,377 20,377 0%
Primary sales 11,971 11,971 11,971 11,971 0%
Secondary sales 8,406 8,406 8,406 8,406 0%
Unsold inventory (total) 41,143 43,372 42,290 45,180
Unsold inventory (primary) 33,191 32,274 34,190 40,052
Est. new supply in secondary market 7,952 11,099 8,101 5,129
(assume 50% of previous new sales)
Est. new supply in primary market 11,054 13,887 17,833
% increase 154% 26% 28%
Absorption rate (total) 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.2
Absorption rate (primary) 2.8 2.7 2.9 3.3
Diagram 19: Sensitivity analysis if supply can be absorbed – Scenario 2
Scenario 2: 2016 2017E 2018E 2019E % increase
Assume sales moderates to between 2016
sales and 2017E annualised sales (~ +20%)
Total sales 24,639 24,639 24,639 24,639 21%
Primary sales 14,842 14,842 14,842 14,842 24%
Secondary sales 9,797 9,797 9,797 9,797 17%
Unsold inventory (total) 41,143 72,775 70,739 76,620
Unsold inventory (primary) 33,191 29,403 28,449 31,440
Est. new supply in secondary market 7,952 43,372 42,290 45,180
(assume 50% of previous new sales)
Est. new supply in primary market 11,054 13,887 17,833
% increase 154% 26% 28%
Absorption rate (total) 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.5
Absorption rate (primary) 2.2 2.0 1.9 2.1
Source: URA, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
16
Land-Banking –
Going All Out To Win
W
Intense competition for ith dwindling property inventory on their books, most developers are
land facing challenges in restocking land in Singapore, given lower returns amid
strong competition - largely from new players and foreign developers; the
returns are worsened by a lack of available land sites for tender in the
government land sales (GLS) programme.
In addition, the increased presence of new foreign players in land tenders whose
motivations go beyond profit margins – they seek to “plant their flag” in Singapore as
well as deploy their internal excess capital and resources – has also resulted in land prices
remaining elevated. Average bids per tender have increased from 10 bids per tender in
2015 bids to 12 bids per tender in 2016. 2017 started strongly, with an average 13 bids
per tender with a high of 24 for a tender at Toh Tuck Road.
Tender prices for land sites that were awarded in 1H17 have surprised investors, with a
number of “record bids” for selected residential and mixed-use4-cum residential sites
that exceeded S$1bn and topped consultants’ estimates. According to our estimates,
average bids have exceeded S$800 psf in 2016 and so far in 2017. The increase is also
partially due to a rise in the availability of centrally located land sites.
Diagram 20. Competition for land tenders has been increasing
Source: URA, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
17
Diagram 21. Tender prices have been inching higher to cross S$800 psf
Source: URA, DBS Bank
Developers Pricing In Rise In Launch Prices
Margins under pressure Over time, we have found that the costs of construction have continued to remain high,
mainly because cost components have stayed high – i.e. cost of labour and materials
have stayed stable over time while the authority’s push for the use of pre-fabrication, pre-
finished volumetric construction (PPVC) at selected GLS sites and most future GLS sites
has meant that the total costs of construction are likely to remain high going forward.
With developers’ inability to raise prices, coupled with upward pressures from the rising
costs of construction, developers’ net margins have been compressing over the past few
years. Meanwhile, some mid-sized developers have also teamed up with contractors to
keep their overall project costs down in order to compete. Therefore, going forward, we
believe that mid-sized developers are likely to be increasingly crowded out in land tenders
and will likely either focus on smaller sites which are lower in quantum or on collective
sites as land-banking alternatives.
The intense competition for land has resulted in narrowing margins. Based on our
estimates, developers’ average net margins have fallen over 2006-2012 from an average
of 20% – ranging from 18%-26% - to an average of 9%-15% from 2013 onwards
According to our assumptions, we estimate that average net margins are expected to
turn negative for a majority of projects awarded in the later part of 2016 to the first
half of 2017, implying the zealousness in developers’ bids, with most imputing higherDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
18
launch prices when these projects come to the market sometime in 2018. This is based on the
assumption of a 10% net margin and current prices for newly launched projects in the vicinity.
A risk of losses According to our base-case scenario of a two-tier market recovery in 2018 led by the
luxury end of the residential market, we believe that there is a possibility that selected
projects that were won in recent tenders could see losses if a more sustained recovery
in prices is underway. Developers could also time their project launches to capture rising
buyer sentiment to maximise returns.
Time-to-market Over time, developers have calibrated their project launch schedules to suit market
to shorten? demand. A typical project time-to-market rangesDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
19
Diagram 23. Land prices form a substantial c.60% of total construction costs
Source: URA, DBS Bank
Diagram 24. Average time-to-market could be shortened to catch the “wave” and
the current positive buyer sentiment
Source: URA, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
20
Strong pre-sales can greatly improve returns
Qualitative aspects such as connectivity to public transportation, as well as historical and
potential competing supply in the submarket are key attributes that a developer will
consider when deciding to bid for a site. This will inevitably have an impact on home-
buyers response and the level of pre-sales the developer can achieve when the project
is launched. Based on our estimates, strong pre-sales can substantially lower the overall
costs of development and a developer’s return-on-equity (ROE).
Below is an illustration of a bid, based on the following assumptions. Assuming a land bid
of S$1,000 psf ppr, we estimate that development costs could range between S$461 and
S$789 psf, depending on the quality of the product that a developer would like to build.
Assuming a project with medium-quality furnishes (our base-case scenario) and achieving
an average selling price of S$1,700 psf, we estimate the project to achieve a net margin of
c.8.3%. Every S$100 increase in the selling price will raise margins by 4 percentage points.
Assuming that the project sells out by year five, the development will achieve a project
rate of return (IRR) of 9%. Assuming an even more positive response from buyers, the IRR
could improve to 40%. Assuming a 65% funding for the land purchase, return-on-equity
is fairly decent at close to 40%.
Diagram 25. Breakdown of a potential land-tender exercise
Site Assumptions: Cost of development: S$psf S$'m
Land Size (Sqm) 10,000 Land Cost 1,000 301.4
(Sqft) 107,640 Construction Cost 300 90.4
Plot Ratio (x) 3 Professional Fees, Sales & Marketing, and Other Fees 104 31.4
GFA/NSA (Sqft) 301,392 Agency Commissions - 5.1
Assumed Land 1,000 Cost of Development (Before Financing) 1,421 428.3
Bid (S$psf ppr)
Construction S$psf Cost of Financing (land) 5 years 89 26.9
cost* range Construction Loan (5 years) 19 5.7
Medium Quality 250-315
Cost of Financing 108 32.7
Good Quality 315-400
Total Cost of Development (With Financing) 1,529 461
Luxury Quality 410-560
GFA/NSA (Sqft) 301,392 Profit Analysis:
Assumed Land 1,000 Launch Price 1,700 512
Bid (S$psf ppr) Less: total development cost (1,421) (428)
Less: total Financing cost (108) (33)
Profit Before tax 171 51
* Estimates are obtained from Rider Levett Profit After tax 142 43
Bucknall (RLB) 1Q17 construction estimates
Source: URA, DBS Bank Net Margin (After tax) 8.3%DBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
21
Diagram 26. Sensitivity of project IRR to pre-sales
Source: DBS Bank
Diagram 27. Sensitivity of net margins to selling prices
Source: DBS Bank
“Margin of error” diminishing, given intense competition
With improved market sentiment amongst buyers and in a climate where competition
for new sites is expected to remain intense, we believe that developers will continue
remaining optimistic in their bidding strategy going forward. However, we are wary of
taking an all-out-to win stance, especially when the “margin of error” for development
sites are now thin, with selected sites already pricing a rise in selling prices in order for
the project to break even. While we believe that property prices remain on the road to
recovery, the pace of increase is expected to be on a more gradual path of 3%-5% per
annum in the coming few years, rather than accelerate. The gradual pace of growth
could mean that selected projects, if launched at their target prices that are above currentDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
22
market clearing levels, will see slow absorption at the start before gaining momentum as
the projects approach TOP.
Amongst the tenders awarded in 1H17, we highlight two sites which we believe offer the
most talking points, given differing market expectations when these sites were offered.
Sterling Road site The tender for the Sterling Road site was awarded to a JV between Logan Property
and Nanshan Group for a record S$1.03b, implying a price of close to S$1,050psf ppr.
Assuming construction costs of S$320 psf, other professional fees, stamp duties and
miscellaneous costs of S$161 psf, we have come up with a breakeven price of close to
S$1,600 psf. Assuming a 10% margin, the developer will have to launch the project at
close to S$1,750 psf, which is slightly above the price of comparable developments in
the vicinity; Commonwealth Towers and Queens Peak are selling at an average price of
S$1,600-S$1,700 psf). Unless the developer is able to keep its construction costs down
(compared to our estimates), at current market prices, we estimate that the developer is
likely to make a loss. The IRR for this project ranges from 1% (current market prices) to
as high as 15%.
Toh Tuck site saw Another GLS tender that caught many by surprise is a low-density housing site which
“bullish bid” saw a whopping 24 bids. The Toh Tuck Road site was awarded to SP Setia, a Malaysian
developer for S$265m or S$939 psf ppr, a new record high for a land site in the ‘Outside
Central’ region. The tender saw a whopping 24 bids and our assumed breakeven
is close to S$1,400 psf, which is already above current transaction prices of close to
S$1,100-S$1,200 psf. This implies that launch prices could top S$1,600 psf, which means
that developer is expecting prices to increase fairly strongly for the sub-market when the
project is launched sometime in 2018.
What Should Developers Do?
Upcoming GLS We believe tender bids would remain buoyant and expect winning spreads to tighten
offers interesting further. With the need for PPVC construction techniques, we believe that developers
opportunities to land- might look to have collaborations with contractors who may help lower the overall costs
bank of construction.
Meanwhile the GLS programme in 2H17 does offer interesting opportunities in our view,
especially when there is a variety of available sites in the CCR and OCR region which
should pique the interest of most developers.
Commercial sites in the GLS programme also offer interesting alternatives to add to
developers’ recurring income, especially when new developments will be completed
sometime in 2022-2023, when there will be no competing supply.DBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
23
En-bloc market an An alternative is to enter the collective sales market (en-bloc deals) by whichdevelopers
alternative could have interesting opportunities to restock land. These older properties are located
at more established residential districts which could mean that there’ll be a ready buyer
pool when these projects are re-launched. Downside to an en-bloc exercise are tighter
timeline restrictions that developers would have to adhere to (qualifying certificate rules
on top of additional buyer stamp duty (ABDS) on the land price); this could mean that
developers will remain likely remain selective on pricing. In addition, time-to-market is
typically longer for a GLS site, given time needed to vacate the existing households and
additional feasibility studies to be conducted to prepare the site for redevelopment. A
total of S$1.5b in en-bloc transactions have been completed YTD and we will likely see
more deals in the coming year.
Diagram 28. Summary of selected sites since 2016
Project Site Location* Developer Project Est. # mths Est
Awarded Name launch from Units
Date tender
(Jul'17)
Woodleigh Lane TBC RCR Chip Eng Seng N.A. Est 2018 N.A. 735
Upper Jun-17 OCR SPH N.A. Est 2018 1 825
Serangoon Road
Lorong 1 Realty Jun-17 OCR Fantasia N.A. Est 2018 1 50
Park Investment
Stirling Road May-17 RCR Logan Property & N.A. Est 2018 2 1110
Nanshan Group
Tampines May-17 OCR City Developments N.A. Est 2018 2 715
Avenue 10
Toh Tuck Road Apr-17 CCR SP Setia N.A. Est 2018 3 325
West Coast Vale Feb-17 OCR China Construction N.A. Est 2018 4 520
Perumal Road Jan-17 RCR Low Kheng Huat N.A. Est 2018 5 200
Margaret Drive Dec-16 RCR MCL Land N.A. Est 2018 6 275
Fernvale Road Sep-16 OCR Sing Holdings & N.A. Est 2018 10 575
Wee Hur
Anchorvale Lane Sep-16 OCR Hoi Hup N.A. Est 2018 10 635
(EC)
Martin Place Jul-16 CCR Guocoland Martin Est 3Q17 12 450
Modern
Bukit Batok May-16 OCR Qingjian Le Quest Est 3Q17 14 425
West Avenue 6
Jalan Kandis Apr-16 OCR Tuan Sing Holdings Kandis Est 3Q17 14 110
Residences
Yio Chu Kang Feb-16 OCR Hoi Hup Hundred Jul'17 16 520
Road (EC) Palms
Total launched 7,470
(GLS)
*CCR: Core Central Region, RCR: Rest of Central Region, OCR: Outside Central Region
Source: URA, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
24
Diagram 29. Bid Analysis of sites
Projects # of Bids Winning GFA Land Price Est Prevailing Margins
Bid (m’sqft) (S$psf) Breakeven prices (%)
(S$psf) (S$psf)
Woodleigh Lane 15 700.7 0.63 1,107 1,700 1,300 -19%
Upper Serangoon Road 12 1,132.0 0.96 1,182 1,650 1,300 -21%
Lorong 1 Realty Park 11 75.8 0.14 538 946 1,000 6%
Stirling Road 13 1,002.7 0.95 1,051 1,521 1,550 2%
Tampines Avenue 10 9 370.1 0.65 566 985 1,100 12%
Toh Tuck Road 24 265.0 0.28 940 1,359 1,200 -12%
West Coast Vale 9 292.0 0.49 592 1,012 1,150 14%
Perumal Road 11 174.1 0.17 1,001 1,421 1,400 -1%
Margaret Drive 14 238.4 0.24 998 1,418 1,550 9%
Fernvale Road 14 287.1 0.56 517 937 980 5%
Anchorvale Lane (EC) 16 241.0 0.68 355 725 800 10%
Martin Place 13 595.1 0.48 1,239 1,759 2,300 28%
Bukit Batok West 11 301.2 0.47 635 1,055 1,050 0%
Avenue 6
Jalan Kandis 9 51.1 0.11 481 901 1,050 17%
Yio Chu Kang Road (EC) 10 183.8 0.56 331 701 830 18%
Total launched (GLS)
Source: URA, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
25
Diagram 30. Available sites in 2H17 government land sales programme
No Type Site Zoning Location Land Plot GFA Est. Commercial Status
Size Ratio (Sqm) Units (Sqm)
(Sqm) (x) (no.)
1 Confirmed Serangoon Residential OCR 28,100.0 2.5 70,250 825 - Open
North
Avenue 1
2 Confirmed Chong Kuo Residential OCR 4,800.0 1.4 6,720 90 - Oct-17
Road
3 Confirmed Handy Road Residential CCR 5,200.0 2.8 14,560 130 - Nov-17
4 Confirmed Hillview Rise Residential OCR 28,000.0 2.8 78,400 535 - Dec-17
5 Confirmed Holland Commercial OCR 23,000.0 2.6 59,800 570 13,500 Nov-17
Road & Residential
6 Confirmed Sengkang Commercial OCR 36,300.0 2.1 76,230 700 13,300 Dec-17
Central & Residential
7 Reserve Bartley Residential OCR 4,700.0 2.1 9,870 115 - Available
Road / Jalan
Bunga
Rampai
8 Reserve Yishun Residential OCR 21,700.0 2.8 60,760 805 - Available
Avenue 9
9 Reserve Jiak Kim Residential CCR 13,500.0 3.8 51,300 525 1,500 Available
Street
10 Reserve Fourth Residential CCR 20,200.0 1.8 36,360 445 - Available
Avenue
11 Reserve West Coast Residential OCR 19,500.0 2.8 54,600 730 - Sep-17
Vale
12 Reserve Cuscaden Residential CCR 5,700.0 2.8 15,960 170 - Oct-17
Road
13 Reserve Canberra Residential OCR 41,100.0 2.8 115,080 765 - Nov-17
Drive
14 Reserve Mattar Road Residential OCR 6,400.0 3.0 19,200 255 - Nov-17
15 Reserve Silat Avenue Residential OCR 25,000.0 3.5 87,500 1160 450 Dec-17
16 Reserve Beach Road Commercial CCR 21,000.0 4.2 88,200 - 88,200 Open
17 Reserve Woodlands Commercial OCR 22,400.0 3.5 78,400 275 54,840 Available
Square
Confirmed 2,850 26,800
Reserve 5,245 144,990
Total 8,095 171,790
Source: URA, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
26
Diagram 31. Potential en-bloc deals
Property Location Property Est land size Plot Est GFA Current no. of Potential
Development Type (sqft) ratio (sqft) units no. of
units
Tampines Court Tampines Street 11 HUDC 702,458 2.8 1,966,882 560 2,610
Dunearn Court Bukit Timah Private 14,000 1.4 19,600 12 26
Villa D'Este Dalvey Road Private 55,480 1.4 77,672 12 103
Normanton Park Queenstown HUDC 667,368 2.1 1,401,473 488 1,860
Pearl Bank Apartments Outram Private 82,376 7.2 593,107 280 787
Cairnhill Mansion Orchard Road Private 38,220 2.8 107,016 61 142
Changi Gardens Jalan Mariam Private 200,080 1.4 280,112 60 372
Braddell View Braddell Hill HUDC 618,222 2.1 1,298,266 918 1,723
Florence Regency Hougang Ave 2 HUDC 389,236 2.8 1,089,861 336 1,446
Laguna Park Marine Parade Rd HUDC 677,493 2.8 1,896,982 528 2,518
Chancery Court Dunearn Road HUDC 123,139 1.4 172,395 136 229
Lakeview Estate Upper Thomson Rd HUDC 242,734 2.1 509,741 240 677
Ivory Heights Jurong East St 13 HUDC 825,500 1.6 1,320,800 654 1,753
Pine Grove Clementi HUDC 893,129 2.1 1,875,571 660 2,489
Lagoon View Marine Parade HUDC 535,330 2.8 1,498,925 480 1,989
Thomson View Bright Hill Drive HUDC 540,314 2.1 1,134,659 254 1,506
Lakeside Towers Jurong Private 153,237 2.1 321,798 427
The Claymore Orchard Private 246,000 2.8 688,800 914
Balmoral Road & Ewe Orchard Private 57,349 1.6 91,758 121
Boon Road
Spring Grove Grange Road Private 263,513 2.1 553,377 325 734
Rangoon Road Farrer Park Private 6,879 3.0 20,637 4-storey mixed 27
used & 2-storey
shophouses
Riviera Point River Valley Private 14,580 3.4 49,266 33 65
Lakepoint Condo Jurong Private 560,000 1.4 784,000 304 1,041
Boon Teck Tower Balestier Private 57,588 2.8 161,246 78 214
Brookvale Park Clementi Private 373,000 1.6 596,800 160 792
Amber Park Amber Gardens Private 213,676 2.8 598,293 200 794
Cavenagh Gardens Cavenagh Road Private 128,256 2.1 269,338 172 357
Chuan Park Lorong Chuan Private 402,995 2.1 846,290 452 1,123
City Towers Bukit Timah Private 104,535 2.1 219,524 78 291
Crystal Tower Ewe Boon Road Private 60,482 1.6 96,771 28 128
Gilstead Court Gilstead Road Private 75,479 1.4 105,671 48 140
Hollandia Holland Road Private 53,507 1.8 96,313 48 128
Kemaman Point Jalan Kemaman, Private 43,826 2.8 122,713 89 163
off Balestier Road
Pine Tree Condo Balmoral Park Private 41,361 1.6 66,178 50 88
Total 9,461,342 20,931,832 7,744 27,779
Source: URA, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
27
Offices: On the Cusp of a
Multi-Year Recovery
I
Healthy interest from nvestor demand for Singapore’s office properties has been firm over the past three years
investors despite spot office rents being in a downturn. This can be attributed to investors taking a
medium-term view of the office market and assets in Singapore being a potential store of
value, given its stable government, rule of law, and a relatively stable currency versus other
regional currencies.
An inflexion point? The Singapore’s office market has been experiencing a downturn on the back of sluggish
demand and an increase in supply. As estimated by CB Richard Ellis (CBRE), Grade A CBD
office rents have been falling for eight consecutive quarters, from a peak of S$11.40 psf/
month in 1Q15 to S$8.95 psf/month in 1Q17. Demand for office space has been soft as
the financial services and banking industry, which traditionally represents approximately 40%
of demand for CBD office space, has downsized on the back of slower regional economic
growth, declines in Singapore’s residential market, and slower capital market activity. Partially
offsetting the weakness of the financial services and banking industry has been the emergence
of the technology sector, whose companies are basing themselves in the CBD instead of
business parks, and the growth of the insurance industry.
However, data points appear to be bottoming out. According to Cushman & Wakefield,
premium office rents rose in 2Q17, the first increase in nine quarters. 2Q17 Grade A CBD
office rents was estimated to have risen 1.7% from 1Q17 to S$8.51 psf/mth but were still
down 4% y-o-y. The key driver of the sequential improvement was a recovery in the Marina
Bay area, where rents jumped 5.8% q-o-q and Marina One achieved pre-commitment levels
of around 70%. In addition, rents at Raffles Place were reported to have increased 2.5%,
following a decline of 1.9% in 1Q17. This is in line with our view that the recovery is likely to
be led by Grade A office specs, given the current “flight to quality” that we are seeing from
tenants looking to upgrade their own office specifications.
Supply will drop from Concurrently, as demand continues to be weak, supply has increased. Supply in the Downtown
2018-2020 Core area is projected to increase about.15.6% from 2015 to 2018, or c.5.3m sqft. The jump
in supply is mainly concentrated in 2016 and 2017, with around 2.2m sqft p.a., primarily
related to the following buildings - Duo Tower (570k sqft), Guoco Tower (890k sqft), and
Marina One (1.9m sqft).DBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
28
Thereafter, new office completion will fall off to an average of 0.9m sqft a year, which in our
view can be absorbed easily. With slower completion and less competition for tenants, we
believe that the operating environment will improve and result in a rise in rents going forward.
Diagram 32: Singapore’s Downtown Core office supply and demand outlook
Source: CBRE, media reports, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
29
Diagram 33. Recent and upcoming office supply
Office (CBD) Location Developer Estimated Property Taken-Up/
NLA (sqft) Type Sold
2016
Guoco Tower Peck Seah Guocoland 890,000 Leasing 94%
Street
CPF Building Shenton Way Ascendas-Singbridge JV (324,000) Leasing -
SBF Center Robinson Road Far East 353,480 Strata Sale 84%
DUO Tower Rochor Road M+S 570,475 Leasing 50%
GSH Plaza Cecil Street GSH/TYJ/Vibrant/DB2 282,000 Strata Sale 14%
OUE Downtown 1 Shenton Way OUE 50,000 Leasing n/a
2,145,955
2017
Marina One Marina Bay M+S 1,876,000 Leasing 85%
UIC Building Shenton Way UIC 277,540 Strata Sale 41%
EON Shenton Shenton Way Roxy Pacific Holdings 101,045 Strata Sale 85%
Oxley Tower Robinson Road Oxley Consortium 111,710 Strata Sale 75%
Crown @ Robinson Robinson Road WyWy Developments 70,000 Strata Sale 14%
2,435,925
2018
Ex International Robinson Road Tuan Sing 194,380 Strata Sale n/a
Factors Building and
Robinson Towers
Frasers Tower Cecil Street Frasers Centrepoint 645,000 Leasing 40%
Limited
858,380
2019
Funan North Bridge CapitaLand Mall Trust 204,000 Leasing n/a
Road
204,000
2020
CPF Building Shenton Way Ascendas-Singbridge,
Mitsui and Tokyo 500,000 Leasing
Tatemono
Astro-Asia Shenton Way Afro-Asia Shipping and JV 154,000 Leasing
Redevelopment
654,000
2021
Golden Shoe Market Street CapitaLand Commercial 635,000 Leasing
Trust
Central Boulevard Marina Bay IOI Properties 1,170,000* Leasing
1,705,000
* Maximum potential NLA but may be smaller due to incorporation of service apartments or residential units into the development
Source: URA, Corporate Locations, CBRE, various REITs and corporate, press reports, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
30
Demand To Remain Robust
Record prices achieved While Grade A CBD office rents have fallen by 21% since peaking out in 1Q15 – deeper than
for secondary sales the 14% decline experienced between 3Q11-3Q13 but shallower than 57% drop over 2Q08
and 1Q10 – investor interest in Singapore buildings has not diminished. Demand has been
broad-based, coming from local and overseas investors, as well as SGX-listed REITs, sovereign
wealth funds, insurance companies, corporates, and tycoons.
In fact, record prices have been achieved for some office properties in recent years. For
example, the Straits Trading building, a 999-year leasehold property located at Raffles Place,
was acquired by Mr Tahir, an Indonesian tycoon, for S$3,524 psf, the highest price ever paid
on a psf basis for an office building in Singapore. As a consequence, effective cap rates are
compressing, with a fall in spot rents.
Limited supply Beyond secondary sales of office buildings in Singapore, competition to buy land for the
development of new office towers has also been fierce. Beyond the established locally based
developers, foreign developers have taken an active interest. Out of the top seven bidders in
the recent tender for the Central Boulevard site, only one bid was from a Singapore developer,
Mapletree Group, with the other bidders either a foreign developer or a consortium of a
local and foreign developer. Incidentally, the site was won by IOI Property, a Malaysia-based
developer, at a record price for land of S$1,689 psf, or implied S$3,000 psf of NLA when
the building is completed, assuming a 10% development margin. The strength in demand
for the Central Boulevard site is not an isolated example. This is illustrated by news that the
reserve price for an office site at Beach Road (at the fringe of the CBD) has been triggered
by a developer that implies a land price of c.S$1,200 or implied psf of completed NLA of
S$2,100-2,200; this is the price implied by the equity markets for certain SREITs in the heart
of Singapore’s CBD.
Diagram 34. Grade A office transactions versus Grade A office rents
Source: CBRE, Press reports, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
31
Diagram 35. Recent office transactions
Date Property Name Tenure Attributed Price (S$) Rate per NLA Buyer
Net Lettable
Area (sqft)
1Q14 Finexis Building (50%) 999 LH 142,000 336,600,000 2,371 NTUC Income
1Q14 OUE Bayfront 99 LH (Nov 2106) 402,374 1,005,000,000 2,498 OUE Commercial
REIT
2Q14 Straits Trading Building 999 LH 158,897 450,000,000 2,832 Sun Venture
Jun-14 Prudential Tower 99 years (81) 221,080 512,000,000 2,316 KOP/KSH/Lian
Beng/Centurion
Global
2Q14 Cecil House 99 LH (2080) 50,045 110,000,000 2,177 Vibrant Group and
DB2 Capital
Aug-14 Equity Plaza 74 years 252,135 550,000,000 2,181 GSH Holdings
remaining
Jul-14 Anson House 82 years 76,362 172,000,000 2,252 SEB
remaining
Sep-14 MBFC Tower 3 (one 92 447,327 1,248,000,000 2,790 Keppel REIT
third stake)
Jan-15 AXA Tower 66.5 remaining 675,000 1,170,000,000 1,733 PREH
(2015)
Jun-15 One Raffles Place 99/FH 600,000 1,429,166,667 2,382 OUECT
Jun-15 PWC Building (30% 99 LH 106,712 150,000,000 1,892 DBS Bank
stake)
Dec-15 ICS Building Freehold 67,550 210,000,000 3,109 Mr Zhou
Dec-15 Suntec Tower Two -12, 99 LH 38,352 101,560,000 2,648 Suntec REIT
13 and 29 Floor
Nov-15 CPF Building 99 LH (2067) 324,000 550,000,000 1,698 Ascendas Land
Apr-16 78 Shenton Way 99 LH 181,100 301,500,000 1,665 Alpha Investment
(50% stake) Partners
May-16 Remaining 60% 57 remaining 703,122 1,600,500,000* 2,276 CCT
interest in CapitaGreen expiring 31Mar2073 (2,700 assuming 99-
year leasehold)
May-16 Straits Trading Building 999 LH 158,897 560,000,000 3,524 Mr Tahir - Found of
Mayapada Group
Jun-16 Asia Square Tower 1 99 LH from 2007 1,200,000 3,400,000,000 2,668 Qatar Investment
office & Authority
40,000 retail
Sep-16 110 Robinson Road FH 14,233 45,100,000 3,169 Mr Tahir - Found of
Mayapada Group
Jan-17 GSH Plaza Remaining 725,200,000 2,900 Fullshare Holdings
72 years
Feb-17 PWC Building 78.5 years 355,704 747,000,000 2,100 Manulife
(100% stake)
May-17 One George Street Remaining 446,473 591,600,000 2,650 FWD Group
(50% stake) 85 years
*Based on 100% equity interestDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
32
Diagram 36. Previous land sales
Date Property/Site Land tenure GFA (sqft) Total land price Price per Developer
(S$m) sqft (S$)
Jul-17 Beach Road 99-year leasehold 950,592 1,138 n/a n/a
Nov-2016 Central Boulevard 99-year leasehold 1,520,874 2,569 1,689 IOI Properties
Nov-2015 CPF Building 99-year leasehold 606,088 550 1,032 Ascendas-
expirying 2067 Singbridge
Aug-2013 Frasers Tower 99-year leasehold 830,564 924 1,112 Frasers Centrepoint
(Expected completion Limited
in 2018)
Sep-2011 SBF Center 99-year leasehold 353,476 312 882 Far East
Organisation
Nov-2010 Guoco Tower 99-year leasehold 1,697,876 1,708 1,006 Guocoland
Dec-2007 Asia Square 2 99-year leasehold 1,222,564 953 779 Macquarie Global
Property Advisors
Sep-2007 Asia Square 1 99-year leasehold 1,432,890 2,019 1,409 Macquarie Global
Property Advisors
Sep-2007 South Beach 99-year leasehold 1,580,431 1,689 1,069 City Developments,
Dubai World and
Elad Group
Aug-2007 20 Anson 99-year leasehold 252,069 237 941 Firstoffice
Jul-2007 Mapletree Anson 99-year leasehold 383,808 392 1,021 Mapletree
Jul-2005 MBFC 99-year leasehold 4,714,588 1,908 405 Keppel Land,
Cheung Kong and
Hong Kong Land
Source: URA, Press reports, DBS Bank
There remains an absence of transactions by
Chinese investors in SingaporeDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
33
Diagram 37. List of bidders and bid prices
Ranking Bidder Tendered Tendered Sale Breakeven costs for Implied S$ per sqft of
Sale Price Price in S$ office NLA (S$/sqft) completed NLA
(S$m) per sqft of
GFA
Low end High end Low end High end
1 IOI Properties 2,569 1,689 2,780 2,942 3,090 3,275
2 Mapletree Investments 2,207 1,451 2,461 2,623 2,727 2,911
3 Nashan Group 2,187 1,438 2,444 2,605 2,707 2,891
4 Hongkong Land & 2,126 1,398 2,390 2,552 2,646 2,831
Cheung Kong
5 CapitaLand & Great 2,005 1,318 2,283 2,445 2,524 2,708
Eagle Group
6 Yanlord 1,985 1,305 2,266 2,427 2,504 2,688
7 OUE Limited, 1,910 1,256 2,199 2,361 2,429 2,613
Guangzhou R&F
Properties and Tang
City Properties
Source: URA, press reports, DBS Bank
Demand For Physical Real Estate To Continue
A medium-term view Given the disparity between public and private markets on the valuation of Grade A office
buildings, with the public markets ascribing a 10-20% discount to recent market transactions,
the question has arisen: How long an investment horizon investors are prepared to take, given
headline yields for these transactions, assuming current spot rates? Assuming a purchase price
of S$2,700 psf and 95% occupancy, CBRE Grade A spot rents of S$8.95 translates to a cap
rate of c.2.8%. With borrowing costs of, say, 2-2.5%, this leaves a tight spread of 0.3-0.8%.
As such, investors in the office sector are pricing in a recovery in rents, in anticipation of a
recovery in office rents, given an easing in new supply over the next three years as well as
other factors such as the Singapore dollar being a store of value. Based on the purchase price
of S$2,700-3,000 psf for recent transactions, investors may be anticipating rents to eventually
recover to S$12.75-$14.00 psf/mth, assuming a stabilised cap rate of 4%.
Chinese investors Despite an increase in foreign buyers from Malaysia, Qatar, Indonesia, and Hong Kong, there
remains an absence of transactions by Chinese investors in Singapore. Chinese investors have
been actively buying commercial assets in Hong Kong, the US, the UK, and Australia. While
we understand that Chinese investors are looking at the Singapore market, the ability of
these Chinese buyers to close transactions is partially curtailed by the lack of large Grade ADBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
34
properties that are available for sale. A significant number of premium buildings are owned
by a handful of owners who are unlikely to sell, given the difficulty in redeploying capital back
into Singapore. Nevertheless, going forward, we believe it is matter of time before Chinese
investors make a splash. Given the intense level of competition and potentially low cost of
capital for certain investors, we would expect capital values for office assets to remain firm
in the near term and bidding for any land released by the government to be fierce. This may
have the unintended consequence of crowding out Singapore-based developers.
Actual recovery in While our base case is for office capital values to remain stable, given strong investor interest,
office rents needed and we expect market rents to recover over the coming three years, primarily concentrated
in Grade A offices, an actual recovery in spot rents will still need to take place to validate
the views of buyers. If market rents do not recover, increase slower than expected to due to
weaker-than-expected demand, or the impact of shadow space (space vacated by tenants
who move to newer buildings) becomes more pronounced, the interest in office properties
at current prices would likely moderate, tempering capital. In addition, a recession would put
into question prices paid by investors currently.
Diagram 38. Office yield spread (cap rate less 10-year Singapore bond yield)
Source: URA, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
35
Diagram 39. Prime office capital values versus estimated prime office rents
Source: Press reports, various SREITs, DBS Bank
Diagram 40. Prime office capital values versus estimated cap rate
Source: Colliers, DBS BankDBS Asian Insights SECTOR BRIEFING 53 36
DBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
37DBS Asian Insights SECTOR BRIEFING 53 38
DBS Asian Insights
SECTOR BRIEFING 53
39
Disclaimers and Important Notices
The information herein is published by DBS Bank Ltd
(the “Company”). It is based on information obtained
from sources believed to be reliable, but the Company
does not make any representation or warranty, express
or implied, as to its accuracy, completeness, timeliness
or correctness for any particular purpose. Opinions
expressed are subject to change without notice. Any
recommendation contained herein does not have
regard to the specific investment objectives, financial
situation and the particular needs of any specific
addressee.
The information herein is published for the information
of addressees only and is not to be taken in substitution
for the exercise of judgement by addressees, who
should obtain separate legal or financial advice. The
Company, or any of its related companies or any
individuals connected with the group accepts no
liability for any direct, special, indirect, consequential,
incidental damages or any other loss or damages of
any kind arising from any use of the information herein
(including any error, omission or misstatement herein,
negligent or otherwise) or further communication
thereof, even if the Company or any other person has
been advised of the possibility thereof.
The information herein is not to be construed as an offer
or a solicitation of an offer to buy or sell any securities,
futures, options or other financial instruments or
to provide any investment advice or services. The
Company and its associates, their directors, officers
and/or employees may have positions or other interests
in, and may effect transactions in securities mentioned
herein and may also perform or seek to perform
broking, investment banking and other banking or
financial services for these companies.
The information herein is not intended for distribution
to, or use by, any person or entity in any jurisdiction
or country where such distribution or use would be
contrary to law or regulation.Living, Breathing Asia www.dbs.com
You can also read
