Thursday, 4 July 2013

TO WATCH ON BUBBLE RISK IN THE PROPERTY SECTOR



After property Consultant Kiight Frank warned of the alarming condition in the property sector that prices in this sector no longer reflected the actual price meaning a signal of bubble now was the World Bank’s turn to give the same warning.
               
In their report entitled Indonesia Economic Quarterly released on March 18, 2013 last, the World Banks stated that Indonesia’s property held the risk of bubble. The indicator was high increase of price and property credit through 2012 especially in the sectors of apartments, retail, office buildings and industrial estates in Jakarta. This institution rated that the price of Property in Indonesia, especially in big cities like Jakarta, Bandung, Surabaya and Denpasar had gone way beyond reason.
               
The World Bank noted that selling price of apartments in Jakarta till end of 2012 had risen by 43% against end of 2011 [y o y] at the same time growth of credit for apartment ownership [KPA] soared up by 84% over the same period.
               
The same was with increased selling price of office building which came to 43% over the same period. The rental price of the industrial sector also increased by 22% over the same period. One thing was sure the price increase in the property was closely related to property credit which soared to 37% in Semester I-2012. Mortgage [KPR] over the same period also soared up by 47% against the same period the previous year.
               
But still according to the report the World Bank admitted that BI’s step to restrict Loan to Value since July 2012 was potential enough to slowdown mortgage credit. So far, pipelining only constituted 14% of bank’s total asset.
               
Although the World Bank gave their warning of bubble risk, data of BI had it that since the LTV rule was in effect, growth of apartment credit was in constant downturn. In spite of slight increase in the last 2 months of 2012, as a whole the probability of bubble in this sector was not significant enough.
               
The Central Bank also noted that most property buyers were real buyers, not speculators with investment motives. Homes were needed by consumers who were mostly first buyers. Today banks were more cautions about financing the property sector not being careless because the threat of non-performing loan loomed large with all the consequences.
               
Bankers tend to extend credit facilities for property, for example mortgage [KPR] only for buying of first house. For second house, banks would be more selective in extending credit.
               
In tune with BI’s view the Indonesia Property Watch [IPW] also rated that the World Bank’s statement about bubble threat in Indonesia’s property market was exaggerated. According to IPW, the property market did increase significantly in the past one year, but what actually happened was not bubble but a condition of overvalued.

A condition of overvalued happened when there was difference of price of 15% - 20% between the primary market and secondary market. What was happening now was that the market drifting toward new equilibrium in 2013.

However there was nothing wrong is the Government and banking regulator make deeper insight to check if the bubble potential actually loomed in the next phase. The problem was that many experts rated the property price at present was not reasonable. Prices soared high above people’s income. A condition a such was dangerous to national economy. Remember the economic and financial crisis in the USA in 2008 was triggered by bursting property bubble.

In America the phenomenon was known as sub-prime mortgage. Unless immediately tacked, it was not impossible that the same kind of crisis would smash Indonesia the way it happened in the USA. How could such trigger economic crisis in Indonesia? The cause was if developers turned greedy and in many ways increase property prices beyond reason, just to reap as much profit as possible.

The main objective was to lure many capital possessors to invest their money in property projects by promising profit of 50% in 6-12 moths. So the price increase was nothing but developer’s game. With the power of money they fabricate “puppet” investors who rush for property to draw the attention of real investors, i.e. capital owners who wished to invest their money.

At a glance the process seemed to have no potential impact on the monetary condition in Indonesia; but to look at it more closely, the investors bought something at a price way above reasonable price so big profit poured in into the pocket of fraudulent developers. If the profit were only circulated domestically in Indonesia, the effect was not too significant on Indonesia’s monetary condition, but still such was no healthy business.


But if the profit was transferred to their private account abroad like Hong Kong or Swiss, there would be severe capital flight which was extremely dangerous to monetary stability at home, this was one point to be watched by the Government and related regulators.

One thing to be highlighted was how to avoid the bubble threat so it would not burst, which would endanger national economy. The role of bank regulators was needed to control increasing demand.

The banking circles which managed credit property must also be more selective in channeling out credit. Not just to pursue credit volume but careless in pipelining them. In the early phase credit might seem to be safe, but in the next two or three years NPL would burst out.

Developers should also be more ethical and correct in offering property prices. Pricing should not be flavored with misleading gimmicks that says “Price will soon increase by so many percent. They should give fair, transparent and objective explanation to prospect buyers.

Lastly, consumers must be more cautious before selling property. Property buying should better be adjusted to their paying capacity. Buying’s should not be meant as speculation unless the consumer was basically a broker. If the above steps could be well exercised, surely the threat of bubble could be mitigated. (SS)



Business News - March 27,2013

No comments: