Question Author Post Content E3-09 datetime 2010-07-26 02:22e3-09-e3-16).pdf · 2017-12-07 ·...

Question AuthorPost

datetimeContent

( ) 007 2010-07-26

02:22

[MsgID #565] 80 6

Buddy

( )

House

House 2000 House

5-6

= x

over 20, >20

around 10, around 6

?

/ /

" "

" "

( bill gate, buffet, wal mart)

and

supply demand

6000 Yoho Midtown

?

field ( )

( )

7/8 ( 13/15 )

( ) (

)

( )

( ) bangicheng 2010-07-26

02:38

[MsgID #566] house 1400 , house, 140 , ,

house , ( , ), .

http://cablenews.i-cable.com/webapps/pr ... o_id=82954

<quote: 007 : 80 6

Buddy

( )

House

House 2000 House

5-6

= x

over 20, >20

around 10, around 6

?

/ /

" "

" "


and

supply demand

6000 Yoho Midtown

?

field ( )

( )

7/8 ( 13/15 )

( ) (

)

E3-09

App II - Vol 3 - 212

( )

>


02:50

[MsgID #567]

<quote:bangicheng : house 1400 , house, 140 , ,

house , ( , ), .

http://cablenews.i-cable.com/webapps/pr ... o_id=82954

>

new york, london , " " ,

country wor

( ) henry_boyie 2010-07-26

09:17

[MsgID #568] 80 6

Why you dont buy an apartment in 08/09??

5-6

It's normal, What you want? Do you want to buy an apartment just after you graduated? I graduated from in 1998 and buy my first apartment in 2001.

That means you still have choice. My first apartment was with 300sq.ft usuable floor area only in N.T. That's the you mentioned.

?

/ /

That's very normal, basic economic principle is ppl only have limited resources but unlimited wants. If you earn 30k per months, you want to live in HK, have a 1000ft apartment and / /

and ....... If such limited resources can fulfill all your unlimited needs, the whole economic model will collapse.


and

Why not you buy some 1, 12, 16, 17 and becomes partners to these developers? Also, pls take into account the fact that HK is a small place with ~1100 sq.km and most areas cann't develop but with 7M people.

supply demand

6000 Yoho Midtown

That being said, there are many rich people in HK. If property drop, those bought Yoho Midtown at $6000 bankrupts, it's their problem.

?

Developers buy a piece of land at 10k per ft, with 3k/ft construction costs, 1k/per ft for finance cost, they sell it at 20k per ft, the gross profit margin is 40%. Assuming they have no other cost, they will have to pay 17% profit tax and end up with 23% net profit after tax. Dont you think it is reasonable with the risk level developer is facing? Do you know the profit margin of 7-11, Micosoft, Wal-Mart...etc?

For your case, if you buy a in NT. I am sure you will not . Of course, if

you want a 1000ft apartment in CBD, it's a different story.

Do you want HK , on taxation system, MPF...etc.

( ) henry_boyie 2010-07-26

09:17

[MsgID #569] 80 6

Why you dont buy an apartment in 08/09??

5-6

It's normal, What you want? Do you want to buy an apartment just after you graduated? I graduated from in 1998 and buy my first apartment in 2001.

That means you still have choice. My first apartment was with 300sq.ft usuable floor area only in N.T. That's the you mentioned.

?

/ /

That's very normal, basic economic principle is ppl only have limited resources but unlimited wants. If you earn 30k per months, you want to live in HK, have a 1000ft apartment and / /

and ....... If such limited resources can fulfill all your unlimited needs, the whole economic model will collapse.


and

Why not you buy some 1, 12, 16, 17 and becomes partners to these developers? Also, pls take into account the fact that HK is a small place with ~1100 sq.km and most areas cann't develop but with 7M people.

supply demand

6000 Yoho Midtown

That being said, there are many rich people in HK. If property drop, those bought Yoho Midtown at $6000 bankrupts, it's their problem.

?

Developers buy a piece of land at 10k per ft, with 3k/ft construction costs, 1k/per ft for finance cost, they sell it at 20k per ft, the gross profit margin is 40%. Assuming they have no other cost, they will have to pay 17% profit tax and end up with 23% net profit after tax. Dont you think it is reasonable with the risk level developer is facing? Do you know the profit margin of 7-11, Micosoft, Wal-Mart...etc?

For your case, if you buy a in NT. I am sure you will not . Of course, if

you want a 1000ft apartment in CBD, it's a different story.


Do you want HK , on taxation system, MPF...etc.


09:40

[MsgID #570] , , ,law d

, house 1400 , .

, , , 50

, ?

<quote:henry_boyie :Do you want HK , on taxation system, MPF...etc.>

( ) fireball 2010-07-26

10:02

[MsgID #571] <quote: 007 : 80 6

Buddy

( )

House

House 2000 House

5-6

= x

over 20, >20

around 10, around 6

?

/ /

" "

" "


and

supply demand

6000 Yoho Midtown

?

field ( )

( )

7/8 ( 13/15 )

( ) (

)

( )

>

friend d , ..

... d ... , ...

d ...

... d...

friend ?? 40 %...

... ... ...

... ...

? ?

5-6

? 5-6 ....

, d ...

.. .. ...

.. ..

.. ...

80 o .. d o

...

d o ...

... ... o .. ,

1000 ... ... d

...


10:33

[MsgID #572] , ,

( , )

0

( ) kinkins 2010-07-26

19:00

[MsgID #573] , 2011 , ,

,

, ,


,

, ,

, ,

,

, 2 ,

, !

( ) 007 2010-07-27

02:04

[MsgID #574] henry_boyie fireball bangicheng, , o

, , , o

oo120 Q D , , , ,

,

( ) XLarage123 2010-07-27

08:31

[MsgID #575]

<quote:kinkins : , 2011 , ,

,

, ,

,

, ,

, ,

,

, 2 ,

, !>

, 2 ?

?

( ) wasper 2010-07-27

09:51

[MsgID #576]

<quote: 007 :henry_boyie fireball bangicheng, ,

o , , , o

oo120 Q D , , , ,

, >

point . . id.

point up , oo120 .

. .

sgh ,

( )

( )

5 5 , ? ?

( )

. search post ?

, forum . d post .

( ) wasper 2010-07-27

09:52

[MsgID #577] <quote:XLarage123 : , 2

?

?>

2

, 2 , 3

( ) monica426 2010-07-27

12:31

[MsgID #578] , , ,

. 2 3 , 4 , 600-800 ,

, , , , ,

, . , d

( , , , ),

, ,


12:49

[MsgID #579] 150 , ,2 , , 5 ?

1 ?

http://www.centadata.com/ptest.aspx?typ ... fo=&page=0

, 13 16 ?

<quote:monica426 : , , ,

. 2 3 , 4 , 600-800 ,

, , , , ,

, . , d

( , , , ),

, , >

( ) yingdash 2010-07-27

12:59

[MsgID #580] <quote:Throne :1. 18

2. .

3. , ( 8 )

4. . ( )

5. $8500 $14000( 450 ),2 $15000

$24000( 400 ) 2 SAVE , ,

6. 350 700 (

)

7. ( )

8. " " " "


9. , ( , )

10. ( CHECK), $26000, $16000,

>

!! !!

d /

( ) monica426 2010-07-27

14:33

[MsgID #581] 13-16 ? , , 33-36

[quote="bangicheng"] 150 , ,2 , ,

5 ? 1 ?

http://www.centadata.com/ptest.aspx?typ ... fo=&page=0

, 13 16 ?


16:14

[MsgID #582] , , . ,150

, , . ,

,waiter sales, , d

<quote:monica426 : 13-16 ? , , 33-36

>

( ) 2010-07-27

17:25

[MsgID #583] <quote:bangicheng : , , .

,150

, , . ,

,waiter sales, , d

[quote=monica426] 13-16 ? , , 33-36

>[quote]

,

i-square, 25

( ) wasper 2010-07-27

17:31

[MsgID #584]

<quote:monica426 : , , ,

. 2 3 , 4 , 600-800 ,

, , , , ,

, .

d,

, d

, ( , )

( , , , ),

, , >

, ( , , , ) ?

( ) henry_boyie 2010-07-27

17:40

[MsgID #585] <quote: 007 :henry_boyie fireball bangicheng, ,

o , , , o

oo120 Q D , , , ,

, >

, , .

, , 08/09 ?

, D, D,

D . ,

.

07 , 4 , 60 .

, 250 , , , 220-230

.08-09 20%, 200 , ,

, , 180 .

, 260-270 , 3 . .

, , , , , ,

, . .

viewtopic.php?p=3391#p3391

, , , .

( ) fireball 2010-07-27

18:51

[MsgID #586]


o , , , o


oo120 Q D , , , ,

, >

!

o d o ..

, d d .... 80

... ... 60 ... d ...

d check...

o d backgroud ...

( ) oo120 2010-07-27

23:27

[MsgID #587]


o , , , o

oo120 Q D , , , ,

, >

, , 9 , wasper

, , , , 9 ,

, , ,

, , , E E

, E ****

( ) oo120 2010-07-27

23:28

[MsgID #588] ****

( ) oo120 2010-07-27

23:29

[MsgID #589] E


23:55

[MsgID #590] , D , , .

.

? 13 , 97 10%, 40

. . .

98 3 , , , 03 , ...

....

<quote:oo120 : E >


00:21

[MsgID #591] <quote:bangicheng : , D , , .

.

? 13 , 97 10%, 40

. . .

98 3 , , , 03 , ...

....

>

, , , ,

, ,

, ,

, , ,

.

( ) fireball 2010-07-28

10:09

[MsgID #592]

<quote:oo120 :

, , 9 , wasper

, , , , 9

, , , ,

, , , E E

, E ****>

, o ? o d ,

o o !

?

henry_boyie 08 d d ?

o ? d o

!

?? , , d d , o ...

... .... o

, sign ... ?

...

, law...

, d ! ifc ...

o law..

.. ... , ,

..

o d ..


d , d law... ??

( ) oo120 2010-07-28

13:26

[MsgID #593] , o ? o d

, o o !

?


o ? d o

!

?? , , d d , o ...

... .... o

, sign ... ?

...

, law...

, d ! ifc ...

o law..

.. ... , ,

..

o d ..

d , d law... ??

SORRY, , ? X

, , , , , ,

SIZE GAS, , , , ,

, , D ?? OK?? E

, Q , OK??


13:52

[MsgID #594] , ,

, .

( ) 2010-07-28

14:20

[MsgID #595]

( ) fireball 2010-07-28

14:22

[MsgID #596] <quote:oo120 :

SORRY, , ? X

, , , , , ,

SIZE GAS, , , , ,

, , D ?? OK?? E

, Q , OK?? >

side gas? ? ! ?? q ?

o o , ! post

d ...

o idea, ,

d , d

d

( ) oo120 2010-07-28

16:13

[MsgID #597] <quote:fireball :

side gas? ? ! ?? q ?

o o , ! post

d ...

o idea, ,

d , d

d >

, , ?? ,

, ?? ??

( ) Ricky 2010-07-28

16:41

[MsgID #598]

<quote:oo120 :

, , ?? ,

, ?? ?? >

( ) 007 2010-07-28

17:01

[MsgID #599] <quote:oo120 : , o ? o d

, o o !

?



o ? d o

!

?? , , d d , o ...

... .... o

, sign ... ?

...

, law...

, d ! ifc ...

o law..

.. ... , ,

..

o d ..

d , d law... ??

SORRY, , ? X

, , , , , ,

SIZE GAS, , , , ,

, , D ?? OK?? E

, Q , OK?? >

, , ,

,

( ) XLarage123 2010-07-28

17:04

[MsgID #600] <quote: :

>

, o , o

, !

( ) XLarage123 2010-07-28

17:05

[MsgID #601] , , ,

, [/quote]

MPF , o

( ) TRACY 2010-07-28

17:07

[MsgID #602] ** , (

, )**

** 90%( 90% ),

3 , ,

( : 5% )**

** .

. ( , )**

( ) Ricky 2010-07-28

17:18

[MsgID #603]

<quote: 007 :

, , ,

, >

, , ,

, ,

, ?

( ) 70 2010-07-28

17:32

[MsgID #604]

( ) fireball 2010-07-28

17:35

[MsgID #605]

<quote:oo120 :

, , ?? ,

, ?? ?? >

d o , o ! o d


17:42

[MsgID #606] , , ?

? , .

, , , . ,

. , ,

<quote:70 :


>

( ) chanKH 2010-07-29

13:56

[MsgID #607] .

.

. .


15:19

[MsgID #608] , 40% , 20% ,

<quote:chanKH : .

.

. .>


15:22

[MsgID #609] , , , 81 , .

, d

( ) 2010-07-29

22:03

[MsgID #610] (

)

( ) ckkl 2010-07-29

22:19

[MsgID #611] ?


22:36

[MsgID #612] , , ,

, . , . , .

, , , ,

,... ....

, , , , ,

,


09:58

[MsgID #613] , . ?

, ,

( ) AC_AC 2010-07-30

10:14

[MsgID #614] 1) It seems that there are abundant cheap flats - remote ones in Tuen Mun as well as old ones (aged 30-45 years) in Tai Kok Tsui etc - that have not been "chosen" by those seeking government's home ownership assistance. Why? Perhaps a) old flats can hardly get mortgages, and b) if I can expect better locations from the government, why remote flats?

2) Even if the government starts building HOS flats (by the Housing Authority or private participating developers), it will take years so there is a time gap, which politicians will still leverage for their own sake

3) To link the above two issues, why don't the government simply buy both types of flats in the open market via agents just like private developers? They can fit requirements like "without fancy club facilities" and small in square foot, etc. Then these flats can be offered on discounts off the market prices like HOS flats. Yet maintenance etc should simply follow the "de-facto" private fees and the government needs not get involved

4) As mentioned by many, I think it fair to restrict re-selling of such flats - any "profit" should go to the government. Indeed, the government may offer loans for large-amount refurbishment works, but these should be deducted from any subsequent profit too

5) It's true that there are inherent risks in such ownership scheme, but why shouldn't there be? In fact, the buyer is allowed to re-sell it to t government and can be given the first right of refusal to rent it back at say 2% return on the government's investment. Fair enough?

6) Some politicians may still claim that such scheme doesn't help participating households to improve their living standard. Well, why should they? If dwellers in public housing estates want to buy a flat, can they claim back all thmonthly rents tht they've paid to the Housing Authority? Of course not. Social protection is to offer minimal protection only. Same as any home ownership assistance scheme

7) Extra land auctions revenue should not be used into social benefits as "excess over budget". These revenues are merely "advanced" from the future. To ease arguments both side, why don't we restrict such "excess" to buying "home pools" as above-mentioned? "Land pools" for "home pools" - similar categories yet inclusive of "social relieve" objectives!

My 2 cents.

( ) AC_AC 2010-07-30

10:33

[MsgID #615] Quote .

.

. .

Unquote

What about creating two markets: a) free economy flats for speculators as well as investors - just like the stock market; b) restricted market flats that bar reselling margin at say 5% gain per year

a) We do have now so let's keep it;

b) create a new pool of lands (specially of smaller lot size for smaller deveopers) with the above restrictive clause on all flats built on them. Well, you can of course expect a lower bid from developers, because the flats must be sold on great disounts even if they are next to type-a flats. Never mind. The government getting less is the same as she spending more on building HOS flats. The beauty is, market intervention is minimal here!

( ) chinahk30 2010-07-30

13:03

[MsgID #616] , ,


, ,

:

1) , ,

1.1 :

1.2 ( ): 1.2.1 ( : 30%800 , 30% 500-800 , 40% 500 )

1.2.2 ,

,

1.2.3 ( ?) ,

1.2.4 , 1.2.2

1.2.5

1.2.6

1.2.7

1:3

2) 5%,

3) , 5 50%

4) , ,

,

5) , , :

5.1 , ,

5.2 , ,

5.3 ( ), 5.1 ,

5.4 800 ,

5.5 , , ,

6) , ,

,

( ) fireball 2010-07-30

14:53

[MsgID #617] <quote:chinahk30 : , ,

, ,

:

1) , ,

1.1 :

1.2 ( ): 1.2.1 ( : 30%800 , 30% 500-800 , 40% 500 )

1.2.2 ,

,

1.2.3 ( ?) ,

1.2.4 , 1.2.2

1.2.5

1.2.6

1.2.7

1:3

2) 5%,

3) , 5 50%

4) , ,

,

5) , , :

5.1 , ,

5.2 , ,

5.3 ( ), 5.1 ,

5.4 800 ,

5.5 , , ,

6) , ,

, >

idea, d o ,

o

4) , ,

, o

o o o

o

o , 3~4 ,

d

, ?

o o o

( ) chinahk30 2010-07-30

17:00


idea, d o ,

o

4) , ,

, o

o o o


o

o , 3~4 ,

d

, ?

o o o >

, ,


17:08

[MsgID #619] , ?

. .

encourage , .

, , , ? /

,

<quote:chinahk30 : , ,

, ,

:

1) , ,

1.1 :

1.2 ( ): 1.2.1 ( : 30%800 , 30% 500-800 , 40% 500 )

1.2.2 ,

,

1.2.3 ( ?) ,

1.2.4 , 1.2.2

1.2.5

1.2.6

1.2.7

1:3

2) 5%,

3) , 5 50%

4) , ,

,

5) , , :

5.1 , ,

5.2 , ,

5.3 ( ), 5.1 ,

5.4 800 ,

5.5 , , ,

6) , ,

, >

idea, d o ,

o

4) , ,

, o

o o o

o

o , 3~4 ,

d

, ?

o o o [/quote]


17:08

[MsgID #620] , ?

. .

encourage , .

, , , ? /

,


, ,

:

1) , ,

1.1 :

1.2 ( ): 1.2.1 ( : 30%800 , 30% 500-800 , 40% 500 )

1.2.2 ,

,

1.2.3 ( ?) ,

1.2.4 , 1.2.2

1.2.5

1.2.6

1.2.7


1:3

2) 5%,

3) , 5 50%

4) , ,

,

5) , , :

5.1 , ,

5.2 , ,

5.3 ( ), 5.1 ,

5.4 800 ,

5.5 , , ,

6) , ,

, >

idea, d o ,

o

4) , ,

, o

o o o

o

o , 3~4 ,

d

, ?

o o o [/quote]

( ) jmi 2010-07-30

17:21

[MsgID #621] , , AGREE !!!

( ) henry_boyie 2010-07-30

17:48

[MsgID #622] <quote:jmi : , , AGREE !!!>

Funny, you can borrow money from bank with 1% interest now and up to 95% mortage, what you expectcan help?

( ) chinahk30 2010-07-30

17:57

[MsgID #623] <quote:jmi : , , AGREE !!!>

,

( ) fireball 2010-07-30

18:35

[MsgID #624]

<quote:henry_boyie :Funny, you can borrow money from bank with 1% interest now and up to 95%

mortage, what you expect can help?>

d ... ...

..

95% h plan.. 0.97 ... ? ...

( ) terry 2010-07-30

22:49

[MsgID #625] , o , o

, ![/quote]

, , , ,

, , D , ......


23:02

[MsgID #626] , " " ,

.

, . ( , , )

, , , , ,D

, !

<quote:terry : , o , o

, !>

, , , ,

, , D , ...... [/quote]

( ) terry 2010-07-30

23:22

[MsgID #627] <quote:bangicheng : , " " ,

.

, . ( , , )

, , , , ,D

, !

>

D, , "#


02:12

[MsgID #628] , . ,

, .


700 , ( , )

, , ,

. ,

( ) abc155 2010-07-31

08:16

[MsgID #629] , , ,

( ) chinahk30 2010-07-31

08:48

[MsgID #630] <quote:bangicheng : , .

, , .

700 , ( , )

, , ,

. , >

,

,

, , ,

, , , ,

, ,

( ) henry_boyie 2010-07-31

09:01

[MsgID #631]

<quote:chinahk30 : ,

,

I wont disagree with it.

, , ,

, , , ,

, ,

1. Do you understand why the gov. can't sell out in previous years? I dont.

2. Have you read the new on the latest application data? 82% applications come from white

applicatants and around half applications are ." ,

, " is it the truth?

I am neutral on HOS. But pls think about the fact before making your statement.

>

( ) chinahk30 2010-07-31

09:12

[MsgID #632]

<quote:henry_boyie : ,

,

I wont disagree with it.

, , ,

, , , ,

, ,

1. Do you understand why the gov. can't sell out in previous years? I dont.

2. Have you read the new on the latest application data? 82% applications come from white

applicatants and around half applications are ." ,

, " is it the truth?

I am neutral on HOS. But pls think about the fact before making your statement.

>

1.

2. , 8:2( 6:4), ( )

, ? 7000

( ) henry_boyie 2010-07-31

09:27

[MsgID #633]

<quote:chinahk30 :1.

Honestly, I dont know. I dont know why ppl suddently has $$ to buy aparment and why they suddently have needs.

2. , 8:2( 6:4), ( )

, ? Agree. 7000

That's why I am netural on HOS. I agree HOS should be designed for , but consider those

actually can't sell out for years and the fact is white applications makes up 82% of the

application. These data doesn't I can't pursuade myself there are high demand on HOS (at least for green applicants)

>

( ) fireball 2010-07-31

12:54

[MsgID #634]

<quote:henry_boyie :

2. , 8:2( 6:4), ( )

, ? Agree. 7000





>

o , d

! o o

d ? , .... d d o

Y ....

...

o o

.. o

d o ?? ,

...

o , ...

o 80 leo ... d

d ...

o , o

, ...

.. .. ... o

80 leo ...

o o " " ..

o ... d o

.. d , d

.. d d ... .. ...

o ! o

...

.... o ??

( ) henry_boyie 2010-07-31

13:04

[MsgID #635]

<quote:fireball : o , d

! o

o d ? , .... d d

o Y ....

...

o o

.. o

d o ?? ,

...

o , ...

o 80 leo ... d

d ...

o , o

, ...

.. .. ... o

80 leo ...

o o " " ..

o ... d o

.. d , d

.. d d ... .. ...

o ! o

...

.... o ??>

resume HOS

( ) TRACY 2010-07-31

13:41

[MsgID #636] , ( , , )

, 5-25 , , 18 , ,

, , .

( , 3

)

** **

1.)

2.)

3.) ,

4.)

( ) chinahk30 2010-07-31

16:44

[MsgID #637]

<quote:fireball :

o , d

! o o

d ? , .... d d

o Y ....

...

o o

.. o

d o ?? ,

...

o , ...

o 80 leo ... d

d ...


o , o

, ...

.. .. ... o

80 leo ...

o o " " ..

o ... d o

.. d , d

.. d d ... .. ...

o ! o

...

.... o ??>

, , ,

, .

, , .

, ,

. , ?

, ?

, 30 ,

, 97 , ,

, , ,

( ) chinahk30 2010-07-31

16:48

[MsgID #638] <quote:henry_boyie :1.

Honestly, I dont know. I dont know why ppl suddently has $$ to buy aparment and why they suddently have needs. , , ,

2. , 8:2( 6:4), ( )

, ? Agree. 7000




>


17:18

[MsgID #639] , , .

, work, ,

98 3 , , ,

<quote:chinahk30 :

, , ,

, .

, , .

, ,

. , ?

, ?

, 30 ,

, 97 , ,

, , ,

>


17:21


, work, ,

98 3 , , ,

>

300 ,8 5 ,

( ) chinahk30 2010-07-31

22:25


, work, ,

98 3 , , ,

>

o o ,

600


Question AuthorPost

datetimeContent

( ) HELP 2010-08-01

07:19

[MsgID #642]

<quote: : o o ,

600 >

( ) fireball 2010-08-01

09:00

[MsgID #643] <quote:chinahk30 :

, , ,

, .

, , .

, ,

. , ?

, ?

, 30 ,

, 97 , ,

, , ,

>

,

, ?

,

! d

d o

, d

!

,

, ,

... o o !

, ???

?

post o ,

, ! ??

forum

, o

, d d

, d

o !

o , d

o , 395

.... d ?? d ??

?? d

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-01

11:19

[MsgID #644]

<quote:fireball : ,

, ?

,

! d

d o

, d

!

,

, 7000 ,

, ,

... o o !

, ???

?

, ( ,

), +

post o ,

, ! ??

forum

, o

, d d

, d

o !

, .

o ,

o , d

o , 395

.... d ?? d ??

E3-10


?? d

, ,

>

( ) orato 2010-08-01

13:43

[MsgID #645] Using to get back from rich tenant is equal to using a bigger cake to get a

small cake back.

is a much bigger benefit.

We have not given enough benefit to rich tenants and now have to give them bigger benefit?

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-01

14:02

[MsgID #646]

<quote:orato :Using to get back from rich tenant is equal to using a bigger cake to get a

small cake back.

is a much bigger benefit.

We have not given enough benefit to rich tenants and now have to give them bigger benefit?>

, 103 , 65 , ,


14:53

[MsgID #647] , .

, ,

<quote:chinahk30 : , 103 , 65 , ,

>

( ) orato 2010-08-01

15:19

[MsgID #648]

<quote:chinahk30 : , 103 , 65 , ,

>

No no no wrong wrong wrong, big big big mistake, you made a very very very stupid mistake!

I rent a two million dollars apartment. I only have the living right after paying the rent.

The two million dollars of the apartment is still belonged to the landlord and I do not owe a penny...

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-01

16:46

[MsgID #649]

<quote:orato :

No no no wrong wrong wrong, big big big mistake, you made a very very very stupid mistake!

I rent a two million dollars apartment. I only have the living right after paying the rent.

The two million dollars of the apartment is still belonged to the landlord and I do not owe a penny...

>

, , , ,

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-01

16:48

[MsgID #650]

<quote:bangicheng : , .

, ,

>

, , ,

, ,

( ) orato 2010-08-01

16:54


, , , , >

Of course la

Your excuse is to blame the government, your usual practice la.

The figure is the cost to build but you make up the other half la

The other half is that you assume renter owns the unit after paying rent la

( ) HELP 2010-08-01

17:34

[MsgID #652]

<quote: :

, , ,

, ,

>

, , , ,


18:00

[MsgID #653] ,

, , .

.

, , .

<quote:HELP :

, , ,


, ,

>

( ) HELP 2010-08-01

18:12

[MsgID #654] <quote: : , , ,

, ,

>

[/quote]

2 , , , , , ,

, , , ,

,

, , 60 (

), 100 ??

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-01

18:43

[MsgID #655] <quote:orato :Of course la

Your excuse is to blame the government, your usual practice la.

The figure is the cost to build but you make up the other half la

The other half is that you assume renter owns the unit after paying rent la

>

, ,

, , , , , ,

The other half is that you assume renter owns the unit after paying rent la<--

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-01

18:48

[MsgID #656]

<quote:bangicheng : ,

, , .

.

, , .

>

,

, ,

( ) HELP 2010-08-01

18:49

[MsgID #657]

<quote: :The other half is that you assume renter owns the unit after paying rent la<--

>

D , ,

( ) fireball 2010-08-01

19:12

[MsgID #658]

<quote:bangicheng : , .

, ,

>

o , !

o ! o ..

( ) orato 2010-08-01

19:15

[MsgID #659]

<quote:HELP : D , , >

? We will be very sorry lor

( ) HELP 2010-08-01

19:32

[MsgID #660]

<quote: : ,

, , >

THAT"S THE POINT


19:41

[MsgID #661]

<quote:HELP : ,

, ,

THAT"S THE POINT>

,

, ,

( ) HELP 2010-08-01

19:56

[MsgID #662]

<quote: :

,

, , >


, , , ,

, ?? D ?

, , , ,

??

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-01

21:15

[MsgID #663] <quote:bangicheng :

,

, , >

, ,

, ,

,


05:49

[MsgID #664] , 16% , , .

8 , 1300 . , .

, . ,

, , ,

, , , . , ,

D , ... . ,

, ,

, , , , , ,


, ,

, >

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-02

09:16

[MsgID #665]

<quote:bangicheng : , 16% , , .

8 , 1300 . , .

, . ,

, , ,

, , ,

, , , . , ,

D , ... .

, , ,

, , o ,

?

, , , , , ,

?

>

( ) Ricky 2010-08-02

11:52

[MsgID #666] <quote:chinahk30 : , , ,

" "?

? : 1 , , 5

, , ,

,

, , o ,

?

" "

?

>

( ) Ricky 2010-08-02

12:06

[MsgID #667] [quote="HELP"]

, , , ,

, ?? D ?

, , , ,

??[quote]

?

2000 2003 ?

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-02

13:28

[MsgID #668]

<quote:Ricky : , , ,

" "?

? : 1 , , 5


, , ,

,

, , o ,

?

" "

?

>

1) 30 , , ,

2) , ,

,

3) ,

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-02

13:32

[MsgID #669]

<quote:Ricky :

?

2000 2003 ?

>

,

97 97

00 03 97 ,

( ) Ricky 2010-08-02

14:25

[MsgID #670] [quote="chinahk30]

1) 30 , , ,

???

/ / / ?

'' ''

2) , ,

,

d ( d ), 2 ,

? ? 8 1 TVB ,

3) ,

'' '' , [/quote]

( ) Ricky 2010-08-02

14:41


,

? ? 50 , ,

97 97

97

00 03 97 ,

? >

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-02

15:19

[MsgID #672] <quote:Ricky : ,

? ? 50 , ,

97 97

97

00 03 97 ,

? >

1) 50 , , ,

2) 97 97 , , .

97 , ? ......

========================================================

1997

2 3 1 3,

30

1984 1997

20 1990 1994 6 2.5

3 8

4 40

60 80 20 90

10 3 4

10 10


2 3

20 50

1997 65

2.2 267 17

( ) Ricky 2010-08-02

16:18

[MsgID #673]

<quote:chinahk30 :quote="Ricky"

,

? ? 50 , ,

97 97

97

00 03 97 ,

? /quote

1) 50 , , ,

2) 97 97 , , .

97 , ? ......

97 97 97

97

? 97 97

========================================================

1997

2 3 1 3,

30

1984 1997

20 1990 1994 6 2.5

3 8

4 40

60 80 20 90

10 3 4

10 10

2 3

20 50

1997 65

2.2 267 17 >

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-02

18:17

[MsgID #674]

<quote:Ricky : ,

? ? 50 , ,

97 97

97

00 03 97 ,

? /quote

1) 50 , , ,

2) 97 97 , , .

97 , ? ......

97 97 97

97

? 97 97

========================================================

1997


2 3 1 3,

30

1984 1997

20 1990 1994 6 2.5

3 8

4 40

60 80 20 90

10 3 4

10 10

2 3

20 50

1997 65

2.2 267 17 >

, ,

( ) Kiroro 2010-08-02

23:23

[MsgID #675]

1)

2)

4

3)

4

3/4

!


23:45

[MsgID #676] 7 , 2 . 03 .

, , , 10%, 4 ,

GRANT AND LOAN

( ),

, , .... ,

<quote:Kiroro :

1)

2)

4

3)

4

3/4

!>


23:50

[MsgID #677] <quote:bangicheng : 7 , 2 . 03 .

, , , 10%, 4 ,

GRANT AND LOAN

( ),

, , .... ,

>

,98 , ( 2 ,

6 )

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-03

09:15


, , , 10%, 4 ,

GRANT AND LOAN

( ),

, , .... ,


>

,

, , ,

, , , , , ,

, , ,

, , , ,

o ,

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-03

09:17

[MsgID #679] <quote:bangicheng :

,98 , ( 2 ,

6 )>

97 ,

( ) wasper 2010-08-03

09:27

[MsgID #680] , forum, , ?

.

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-03

09:29

[MsgID #681]

<quote:chinahk30 : , , ,

>

, , , .

, ...

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-03

09:51

[MsgID #682]


, , , .

, ...>

, ?

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-03

09:56


, ?>

Pls do not

should be provided to people in need. I haven't say they are . Therefore, we have

public housing for those people in need.

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-03

13:32

[MsgID #684] <quote:henry_boyie :Pls do not

should be provided to people in need. I haven't say they are . Therefore, we have

public housing for those people in need.>

, ok? ok?

( ) Ricky 2010-08-03

14:08


, ok? ok?>

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-03

14:15

[MsgID #686]

<quote:chinahk30 : , ok? ok?>

Necessity VS Luxury


16:25

[MsgID #687] , , . + .

, ,

, . , ...


( ) chinahk30 2010-08-03

18:40

[MsgID #688]

<quote:bangicheng : , , . + .

, ,

, . , ...

>

, ?

? , ,

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-03

18:47

[MsgID #689] <quote:henry_boyie : , ok? ok?>


Necessity VS Luxury[/quote]

luxury, , , , .

103 , luxury ?

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-03

19:11

[MsgID #690]


( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-03

19:12

[MsgID #691]


>


19:42

[MsgID #692] , ?

, .97 10%, 2 , 20 ,

10 8


>

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-03

19:53

[MsgID #693]

<quote:bangicheng : , ?

, .97 10%, 2 , 20 ,

10 8 >

I know these. What's your point?

( ) Kiroro 2010-08-04

00:09


, , , 10%, 4 ,

GRANT AND LOAN

( ),

, , .... ,

>

Ans:

1) : 7 , 2 03

03 7

2) : , , , 10%, 4 ,

GRANT AND LOAN. ( ),

3) : , , .... ,

don t put words into my mouth

speculative bubbles

1.7% is HIBOR (use one month

Hang Seng HIBOR on 3.8.2010) 0.23% + 0.7% = 0.93%

gradual

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-04

09:10

[MsgID #695]

<quote:Kiroro :

1)

2)

4

3)

4

3/4

!>

1)


, , , " ",

.

2) 4

96/97 , .

, ( )94 70% , ( )03/04 .

( )03/04, $2M $100.

, . , ?

( ) wasper 2010-08-04

11:01

[MsgID #696]

<quote:henry_boyie : , ?

, .97 10%, 2 , 20 ,

10 8

I know these. What's your point?>

. ?

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-04

11:31

[MsgID #697] <quote:wasper : . ?

>

" " .

"win". , .

, .

( ) 2010-08-04

13:43

[MsgID #698] http://hk.myblog.yahoo.com/tokuhon_blog ... e?mid=5005

3

(7 11 /2008)

3

!

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-04

14:09

[MsgID #699]

<quote: :http://hk.myblog.yahoo.com/tokuhon_blog/article?mid=5005

3

(7 11 /2008)

3

!>

( ) 2010-08-04

14:13

[MsgID #700]

!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


15:02

[MsgID #701] , ,

. . , , ,

. ,

affordable,3000 , , ... 9 7 ....

, ...

http://www.centadata.com/ptest.aspx?typ ... e2=&page=0

, ,

<quote: :

!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>

( ) Ricky 2010-08-04

15:53

[MsgID #702]

68

2008 10 31

http://appledaily.atnext.com/template/a ... d=11786956

68

3,200

182

108 68

40 30


?

200 500

, ,

( ) Ricky 2010-08-04

15:55

[MsgID #703]

2009 01 03

http://the-sun.on.cc/channels/news/2009 ... _0000.html

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-04

18:02

[MsgID #704]

<quote: :

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>

, , , ( ,

)

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-04

18:04

[MsgID #705]

<quote:Ricky :

>

, , ,


18:46

[MsgID #706] .

, , ,


, >

( ) orato 2010-08-04

20:46

[MsgID #707]

<quote: :

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>

This is totally rubbish. If too many land available. if all land of Hong Kong are sold to land developers, land developers will buy them all. They will become the biggest landlords of Hong Kong . We do not want land developers to owe everywhere of Hong Kong and run Hong Kong as a government.

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-04

20:49

[MsgID #708]

<quote:bangicheng : .

, , ,

>

, , o , ,

( ) Kiroro 2010-08-04

21:46

[MsgID #709]


1)

, , , " ",

.

2) 4

96/97 , .

, ( )94 70% , ( )03/04 .

( )03/04, $2M $100.

, . , ?>

2) forfeit 5% deposit 1



23:30

[MsgID #710] , . .

? ? , ,

, d .

, .

, , ?

08 , , , ,

?

, , , , , ( ,

2 )

<quote:chinahk30 : , , o , ,

>


23:46

[MsgID #711] <quote:bangicheng : , . .

? ? , ,

, d .

, .

, , ?

08 , , , ,

?

, , , , , (

, 2 )

>

, .

, , " "

, , , , , ?

" " , , ,

? " "

wor

( ) orato 2010-08-05

00:02

[MsgID #712] Right! I remember Old Tung, after his 1998 Chief Executive Speech/Report in October, openly told us on TV that he had just told his family to buy properties. Many people followed. And Old Tung continuted his >85000 and properties prices continued to drop.

Everyone knows the rest........

This is history............

May God bless you this time.........

( ) kslee 2010-08-05

00:48

[MsgID #713]

<quote:orato :Right! I remember Old Tung, after his 1998 Chief Executive Speech/Report in October,

openly told us on TV that he had just told his family to buy properties. Many people followed. And Old Tung continuted his >85000 and properties prices continued to drop.

Everyone knows the rest........

This is history............

May God bless you this time......... >

Why do you think that Tung's 85000 policy is the cause of property market crisis in 1998 ? Will Asian financial crisis and later SARS be the cause?

( ) orato 2010-08-05

08:54

[MsgID #714] You may not know the impact because you are not smart investors. Some people were not smart investors too so they followed Old Tung's "advice".

Do you forget Old Tung said >85000, not just exactly 85000. During the peak, 120,000 units were builts in one year.

Even just 85000, smart investors would do the following calculation:

85000 x 10 years = 850000

85000 x 20 years = 1,700,000 units = 1.7 million units

Assume 4 persons occupy one unit in the average.

4 persons x 1.7 m= 6.8 million Hong Kong people

This is over supply!

Either these new units or old units would be occupied by rats.

Vacant units will be occupied by rats. This is what we called Rats Paradises

According to the rule of supply and demand, properties prices must drop........

The rest is history.............

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-05 [MsgID #715]


08:58 <quote:bangicheng : , . .

? ? , ,

, d .

o , , o , o

, ? , ....

, .

, , ?

,

, , ?

, ?

08 , , , ,

?

, , ? , ,

. , ,

, , , , , (

, 2 )

, o , , ,

. , , . ,

>

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-05

09:00

[MsgID #716]

<quote:orato :You may not know the impact because you are not smart investors. Some people were

not smart investors too so they followed Old Tung's "advice".

Do you forget Old Tung said >85000, not just exactly 85000. During the peak, 120,000 units were builts in one year.

Even just 85000, smart investors would do the following calculation:

85000 x 10 years = 850000

85000 x 20 years = 1,700,000 units = 1.7 million units

Assume 4 persons occupy one unit in the average.

4 persons x 1.7 m= 6.8 million Hong Kong people

This is over supply!

Either these new units or old units would be occupied by rats.

Vacant units will be occupied by rats. This is what we called Rats Paradises

According to the rule of supply and demand, properties prices must drop........

The rest is history.............>

, ........

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-05

09:04

[MsgID #717]

<quote:bangicheng :

, .

, , " "

, , , , , ?

" " , , ,

? " "

wor >

, , .

,

, ,

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-05

09:06

[MsgID #718]

<quote:kslee :Why do you think that Tung's 85000 policy is the cause of property market crisis in

1998 ? Will Asian financial crisis and later SARS be the cause?>

, ,

( ) Ricky 2010-08-05

09:56

[MsgID #719]

3 6000

2003 02 08

http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/template/ ... id=3108953


<quote:chinahk30 :quote="bangicheng" , .

. ? ? ,

, , d .

o , , o , o

, ? , ....

, .

, , ?

,

, , ?

, ?

08 , , , ,

?

, , ? , ,

. , ,

, , , , , (

, 2 )

, o , , ,

. , , . ,

>

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-05

10:12

[MsgID #720]

<quote:Ricky :

3 6000

2003 02 08

http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/template/ ... id=3108953>

2002

2005/06 115,166 3,583,53

2004/05 119,128 3,511.68

2003/04 103,953 2,465.64

2002/03 81,075 1,746.28

2001/02 89,733 1,952.37

2000/01 86,214 2,126.21

1999/00 90,923 2,456.25

1998/99 114,350 3,140.59

1997/98 177,861 7,360.96

1996/97 170,008 6,133.93

( ) Ricky 2010-08-05

10:45


2002

2005/06 115,166 3,583,53

2004/05 119,128 3,511.68

2003/04 103,953 2,465.64

2002/03 81,075 1,746.28

2001/02 89,733 1,952.37

2000/01 86,214 2,126.21

1999/00 90,923 2,456.25

1998/99 114,350 3,140.59


1997/98 177,861 7,360.96

1996/97 170,008 6,133.93>

1998-2004

2005

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-05

12:49

[MsgID #722] <quote:Ricky :

1998-2004

2005 >

,

,

, ,

2003 ( ) , ,

( ) Ricky 2010-08-05

12:57

[MsgID #723] <quote:chinahk30 :quote="Ricky"

1998-2004

2005 /quote

,

,

, ,

2003 ( ) , ,

>

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-05

13:24


>

, , , ?

( ) Ricky 2010-08-05

14:12

[MsgID #725]

<quote:chinahk30 :quote="Ricky"

/quote

, , , ?>

( )


15:46

[MsgID #726] , , , ,

, , , , ,

,

<quote:Ricky : ( )

>


15:48

[MsgID #727] <quote:bangicheng : , , , ,

, , , , ,

,

>

, , ? ,

( ) ckkl 2010-08-06

00:43

[MsgID #728]

1.

2.

3.

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-06

09:20

[MsgID #729]

<quote:bangicheng : , , , ,

, , , , ,

,

>

,

o , o ,

,

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-06

09:21

[MsgID #730]

<quote:bangicheng :

, , ? ,

>


, ?

( ) orato 2010-08-06

17:44

[MsgID #731] No help should be offered.

If people want to be landlords they can go to Northwestern part of New Territories to buy nice housing at affordable price.

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-07

09:57

[MsgID #732] ,

( ) orato 2010-08-07

10:16

[MsgID #733] <quote:chinahk30 : ,

>

People are making use of the government as a market manipulation tool for their own use. Mr. Government, be aware!


10:23

[MsgID #734] <quote:chinahk30 : ,

>

, 150

, , , ....

( ) orato 2010-08-07

10:46

[MsgID #735] If people think "market manipulation by government" is the right choice, then the government please open government owned fast food restaurants and government owned supermarkets all over Hong Kong, as prices have been increased by 30% and 20% respectively in recent months.

Money saving can then be used to subsidise our own homes.


11:55

[MsgID #736] . UPGRADE

, , , .

, ,

, .

, ,

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-07

15:13

[MsgID #737]

<quote:bangicheng : .

UPGRADE

, , , .

, ,

, .

, , >

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-07

15:15

[MsgID #738]

<quote:orato :People are making use of the government as a market manipulation tool for their own

use. Mr. Government, be aware!>

, , , ?

( ) orato 2010-08-07

23:01


, , , ?>

Other part of the world has no selfish people, thiefs, murderers, rubbish?

Selfish here, selfish there, selfish everywhere........


23:30

[MsgID #740]

<quote:chinahk30 :

, , , ?>

, ( , ), ,

.


Question AuthorPost

datetimeContent

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-08

07:39

[MsgID #741]

<quote:bangicheng : , ( , ),

, .

>

, 10 , ,

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-08

07:40

[MsgID #742]

<quote:orato :

Other part of the world has no selfish people, thiefs, murderers, rubbish?

Selfish here, selfish there, selfish everywhere........>

? ,

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-08

07:44

[MsgID #743]

<quote:bangicheng : , 150

, , , .... >

,

( ) orato 2010-08-08

10:05

[MsgID #744] Mr. Government, the stock of HSBC has raised so much recently, could you please consider to subsidise us to buy some? To us, having a good stock is more important than a home. Thank you very much for your attention.

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-08

10:19

[MsgID #745] <quote:orato :Mr. Government, the stock of HSBC has raised so much recently, could you please

consider to subsidise us to buy some? To us, having a good stock is more important than a home. Thank you very much for your attention. >

, ....


10:35

[MsgID #746] 33 , , ,

<quote:orato :Mr. Government, the stock of HSBC has raised so much recently, could you please

consider to subsidise us to buy some? To us, having a good stock is more important than a home. Thank you very much for your attention. >

( ) 2010-08-11

06:49

[MsgID #747]

1)

2)

3) $300 ?

4) ?

?

( ) fireball 2010-08-11

10:01


1)

2)

3) $300 ?

4) ?

?>

o !

d , o , ,

o .. o ...

...??? ??

, , / ...

...

d .. !

( ) Ricky 2010-08-11

10:22

[MsgID #749]

<quote: :

1)

2)

3) $300 ?

4) ?

?>

: (

) d 3-4K/ 2-3K/

/

E3-11



10:34

[MsgID #750] 9 , ,

<quote:chinahk30 :

, 10 , , >

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-11

10:42

[MsgID #751] <quote:bangicheng : 9 , ,

>

( ) Ricky 2010-08-11

11:57

[MsgID #752]

<quote:chinahk30 :quote="bangicheng" 9 , ,

/quote

>

( ) biuchan 2010-08-11

12:12

[MsgID #753]

, , ?

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-11

12:51


>

,

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-11

12:52

[MsgID #755]

<quote:biuchan :

, , ?>

( ) hktonyma 2010-08-11

13:26

[MsgID #756] , ,

, , ,

, ! , , ;

, ,

, , ,

, , ,

7500-10000 , 4 4000

, 8 , ,

, , 24 ,

( ) yingdash 2010-08-11

14:04

[MsgID #757] d ... ...

..

95% h plan.. 0.97 ... ? ...[/quote]

eg: - ( )

??% ( )

law

law

( ) Ricky 2010-08-11

14:14

[MsgID #758] <quote:yingdash : d ... ...

..

95% h plan.. 0.97 ... ? ...>

eg: - ( )

??% ( )

law

law [/quote]

! cindychan

? ?

( ) Ricky 2010-08-11

14:30

[MsgID #759]

<quote:hktonyma : , ,

, , ,

, ! , , ;

, ,

, , ,


, , ,

7500-10000 , 4 4000

, 8 , ,

, , 24 ,

>

8 5 ? ! 7500-10000

( ) hktonyma 2010-08-11

17:48

[MsgID #760] quote] 8 5 ? ! 7500-10000 [/quote]

RICKY ,

1. 2 , 1 , ,7500-10000

2. 1.5

3. 1 8.5 , 1 8.5 , ,

4. , 7.5K-1 , 8.5

( ) wasper 2010-08-11

18:00

[MsgID #761]

<quote:yingdash : d ... ...

..

95% h plan.. 0.97 ... ? ...

eg: - ( )

??% ( )

law

law >

2003 1

53 ( 13 ) 39 ( 20 ) 3,800

( 48 )

.. choose . d . .

( ) kinkins 2010-08-11

18:14

[MsgID #762] ( yahoo

http://hk.biz.yahoo.com/100810/373/3w1vh.html)

1.

2.

3. 30

( - - )

( -

- )

fb

380

Facebook 3,700

, hket.com


< ?!>

( ) Ricky 2010-08-12

02:13

[MsgID #763]

<quote:hktonyma : 8 5 ? ! 7500-10000

>

RICKY ,

1. 2 , 1 , ,7500-10000

2. 1.5

3. 1 8.5 , 1 8.5 , ,

4. , 7.5K-1 , 8.5 [/quote]

If 7500-10000 , Then can you tell me why? ---->

4 3221

59 1300 09

2 5

9

1.1 2.4 10

12 23 3221 1900

1300 33 7000


08:55

[MsgID #764] , ,

( ) hktonyma 2010-08-12

09:41

[MsgID #765] ricky, thank you your question.

, , , ,

, .

, , , .......

, , , , ,

, , .

, , ,

, , , ,

hope u find a house in a reasonable price soon, ricky.

( ) Ricky 2010-08-12

10:11

[MsgID #766]

<quote:hktonyma :ricky, thank you your question.

, , , ,

, .

, , , .......

, , , , ,

, , .

, , ,

, , , ,

hope u find a house in a reasonable price soon, ricky.>

( ) fireball 2010-08-12

11:33

[MsgID #767]

<quote:Ricky :

12 23 3221 1900

1300 33 7000

>

d o ,

sogx ..

d o ...

.... ?

...d d

.. d d ... law...

d 10k ... ...

o ?

( ) Luke tam 2010-08-12

11:57

[MsgID #768] . .

. , , .

15~20 .

, , 10 . (

). . , 10 2~3

, 1~2 . , .


, , 4 . , 2

.

, 4 2 . , ,

. ( , 2.5 . 1

4 , .)

, , . . 10

. .

. , ( , ,

, ). , 2 2 ,

, , 3 .

, , . .

3~4 review , , .

, , . . .

, . . ,

, . . ,

.

, , .

. . 20~40 . , ,

. / . , 20

. . ( ).

, . . .

. . .

2010 8 12

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-12

13:10


>

1)

2)

3) , ,

( ) smallkenken 2010-08-12

14:29

[MsgID #770]

( ) ckkl 2010-08-12

20:41

[MsgID #771]

!

"

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-12

20:53

[MsgID #772]

<quote:ckkl :

!

"

>

,

( ) hkhouse3 2010-08-12

22:10

[MsgID #773]

<quote:Luke tam : . .

. , , .

15~20 .

, , 10 . (

). . , 10 2~3

, 1~2 . , .

, , 4 . , 2

.

, 4 2 . , ,

. ( , 2.5 . 1

4 , .)

, , . . 10

. .

. , ( , ,

, ). , 2 2 ,

, , 3 .

, , . .

3~4 review , , .


, , . . .

, . . ,

, . . ,

.

, , .

. . 20~40 . , ,

. / . , 20

. . ( ).

, . . .

. . .

2010 8 12 >

( ) orato 2010-08-12

22:36

[MsgID #774] <quote:ckkl :

!

"

>

Agreed, won't just sit quiet this time. Would the government please be prepared for the worst.

( ) Kiroro 2010-08-12

23:22

[MsgID #775]

!

1) The beauty of this suggestion is, there will be a built-in automatic supply adjustment mechanism.

#

#

2)

3)

4)


23:39

[MsgID #776]

( ) Ricky 2010-08-13

10:09

[MsgID #777] <quote:smallkenken :

>


10:35

[MsgID #778]

<quote:Ricky : >

( ) fireball 2010-08-13

10:43

[MsgID #779]

<quote:smallkenken :

>

.. d

97 ...97 d ...??

d 1 ... ...

? ...


benz, ???

( ) Ricky 2010-08-13

10:44

[MsgID #780] [quote="smallkenken [/quote]

( ) Luke tam 2010-08-13

10:49

[MsgID #781] hkhouse3

? . 1) ; 2) ,

.

1) .

2) . 2 ?

, . , .

. , , ,

. .

, . , ,

, . ,

, .

, . . .

<quote:hkhouse3 :

Luke Tam 8/12 :

. .

. , , .

15~20 .

, , 10 . (

). . , 10 2~3

, 1~2 . , .

, , 4 . , 2

.

, 4 2 . , ,

. ( , 2.5 . 1

4 , .)

, , . . 10

. .

. , ( , ,

, ). , 2 2 ,

, , 3 .

, , . .

3~4 review , , .

, , . . .

, . . ,

, . . ,

.

, , .

. . 20~40 . , ,

. / . , 20

. . ( ).

, . . .

. . .

2010 8 12 >

( ) fireball 2010-08-13

10:49

[MsgID #782]

<quote:smallkenken :>

[/quote]

appy ...

...


11:06

[MsgID #783]

<quote:fireball : .. d

97 ...97 d ...??

d 1 ... ...

? ...

benz, ???>

$ $

( ) hkhouse3 2010-08-13

12:24

[MsgID #784] Luke Tam

, ,


, ( , ?),

. , " " , ?

, , ( " ).

?

( ) Ricky 2010-08-13

12:53

[MsgID #785] http://www.facebook.com/pages/zi-zhu-sh ... 208?v=wall

facebook

( ) Luke tam 2010-08-13

14:45

[MsgID #786] hkhouse3

, $50 2 . 200 .

, .

. . .

, ? .

.

" " ? , .

, . , , d , ?

. . .

" , ,

. , , .

, .

180,000 , 15,000. 5,000. 3 1800,000. , 150

. ( , HKMC 2 ). , 150

( .).

<quote:hkhouse3 :Luke Tam

, ,

, ( , ?),

. , " " , ?

, , ( "

). ?>

( ) orato 2010-08-13

15:41

[MsgID #787]

<quote:Luke tam : ? . 1) ; 2)

, .

1) .

2) . 2 ?

, . , .

. , , ,

. .

, . , ,

, . ,

, .

, . . .

[/color]

>

, Really??

Otherwise there won't be >85000

and then suddendly disappered?

( ) whale 2010-08-13

16:33

[MsgID #788]

65

$2000

$24000 $120000

$200 10

( ) antilaziness 2010-08-13

17:54

[MsgID #789] any family has to live in the street in Hong Kong? the answer is a "no", every family has a home, enough units are available for each family, so what is the point?

therefore supply and demand are now in equilibrium but the problem is some guys here want there would be an over-supply situation so that the prices would drop, don't they know that this would hurt the economy and employment?

why not wait? if there is no demand then the prices would certainly drop.

unit prices in new territories is 63% of 1997, if there is under supply, this will not happen.

how many units in hong kong now? are these units not supply? eveybody has to live in new units?

( ) jones 2010-08-14

01:26

[MsgID #790] <quote:Kent : , , >

( ) jones 2010-08-14 [MsgID #791]


01:59 <quote:Kiroro :

[/u]>

30~50


08:27

[MsgID #792]

<quote:jones : 30~50

>


09:04

[MsgID #793]

( )

1.

2. ( )

3.

40 200 40

( ) Ricky 2010-08-14

11:57


>

?

( ) hktonyma 2010-08-14

15:37

[MsgID #795] , ,

, , , ,

, . , , , ,

, 8 5, , , ,

, , 8 5 , , ,

,

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-14

15:47

[MsgID #796]

<quote:Ricky :

?>

, ....

, 1 , ?


16:27


?>

1.

2.


16:30

[MsgID #798]

<quote:hktonyma : , ,

, , , ,

, . , , ,

, , 8 5, , ,

, , , 8 5 , , ,

, >

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-14

17:26

[MsgID #799] <quote:smallkenken :1.

2.

>

o

o , o

http://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-tw/%E5%90%84 ... 7%E8%A1%A8


17:38

[MsgID #800] <quote:chinahk30 : o

o , o

http://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-tw/%E5%90%84 ... 7%E8%A1%A8>


( ) chinahk30 2010-08-14

18:21


>

,


18:29

[MsgID #802]

<quote:chinahk30 : , >

( ) Samuellee 2010-08-14

21:47

[MsgID #803]


22:45

[MsgID #804] <quote:Samuellee :

>


Question AuthorPost

datetimeContent

( ) ckkl 2010-08-15

01:56

[MsgID #805]

?

97

!

"

?


08:25

[MsgID #806]

<quote:ckkl :

?

97

!

"

?

>

:

( )

1.

2. ( )

3.

40 200 40

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-15

09:25


>

, , ( ,

)

,


09:52

[MsgID #808] <quote:chinahk30 : , ,

( , )

, >

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-15

10:02

[MsgID #809]


>

o

,

, o o

, (

, ), .

bangicheng 2010-08-15

E3-12


( ) 10:06 [MsgID #810] , . , , ,

.

, , D , ,

.


10:20

[MsgID #811]

<quote:chinahk30 : o

,

, o o

, (

, ), .>

1.

2.

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-15

10:23

[MsgID #812]


1.

2.

>

,


10:36

[MsgID #813]

<quote:chinahk30 :

#

, >

( ) orato 2010-08-15

11:47

[MsgID #814] Higher tax to spectulators and not more units to incapble persons to be landlords

( ) hktonyma 2010-08-15

11:57

[MsgID #815] , ,

, ,

how reasonable?


11:59

[MsgID #816]

( )

1.

2. ( )

3.

40 200 40


21:36

[MsgID #817] 1.0

( )

1.

2. ( )

3.

40 200 40

:


07:46

[MsgID #818]

( )

1.

2. ( )

3.

40 200 40

1.

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-16

09:53

[MsgID #819]



( )

1.

2. ( )

3.

40 200 40

1.

>

, :

1) 50 80 , ?

2) 40 , , ?

3) o , ,

4) plan , ,


11:14

[MsgID #820] <quote:chinahk30 : , :

1) 50 80 , ?

2) 40 , , ?

3) o , ,

4) plan , ,

>

1. 80

2. 40 10

3.

4.


17:28

[MsgID #821]

1.

2.

1.

2.

3.

1.

2. ( )

1. ( )

2.

40 100 20

:

1.

( ) :

1.

1.

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-16

17:53

[MsgID #822] , , .

, .

( ) kiwi 2010-08-16

19:54

[MsgID #823]

<quote:whale :

65

$2000

$24000 $120000

$200 10

>

( ) kiwi 2010-08-16

20:25

[MsgID #824]

<quote: :


!>

constant

( ) homesweethome

2010-08-16

22:33

[MsgID #825] <quote:ccnh : , ,

, >

( ) Kiroro 2010-08-16

22:34

[MsgID #826] <quote:jones :

30~50

>

1)

2) 30~50

( ) Kiroro 2010-08-16

22:36

[MsgID #827]

<quote:smallkenken : 1.0

( )

1.

2. ( )

3.

40 200 40

:

>

8 12 #775 post ( )

!


"

"

2)

3)

4)

( 40 200 40

)


23:27

[MsgID #828]

<quote:Kiroro : 8 12 #775 post ( )

!


"

"

2)

3)

4)

( 40 200 40


) >

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.


23:28

[MsgID #829]

#

( ) hohoyan 2010-08-17

09:54

[MsgID #830]

$


10:18

[MsgID #831] <quote:hohoyan :

$

>

( ) fireball 2010-08-17

11:22

[MsgID #832] <quote:kiwi : constant

>

, , , o ...

... 3000 d 2000 .. 2000 1500 ...

2000 $2500 2000 ...

... ... 3000 ...

... d o 6000 ...

2000 ... ... ...

o , ? d o

o ...

round... roundlaw?

... , , ,

o ... o o

, , ,

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-17

12:35

[MsgID #833]

<quote:kiwi : constant

>

<quote:fireball : , , , o ...

... 3000 d 2000 .. 2000

1500 ...


2000 $2500 2000 ...

... ... 3000 ...

... d o 6000 ...

2000 ... ... ...

o , ? d o

o ...

round... roundlaw?

... , , ,

o ... o o

, , , >

. , 2-5% ? . ,

10%, . 10% , 10%...

, . " " 20-30% ? 5-6

5-8% ?

( ) Kiroro 2010-08-17

12:52

[MsgID #834] <quote:hohoyan :

$

>

:

put option hedges against the price fall.

(private property market) %

(non HOS market)

8 12 #775 post "

put option.

( ) Kiroro 2010-08-17

13:07

[MsgID #835]


1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

>

!

1)

"

( 40 100 20 ) double blow

3)

4)

5)



14:00

[MsgID #836] <quote:Kiroro : !

1)

"

( 40 100 20 ) double blow

3)

4)

=

5)

>

( ) mic168 2010-08-17

23:31

[MsgID #837] ! , !! ga !!

$$ !!

To: , la .. e + ??!! , d $$ , so

!!

, $$ !! , !! 2003 d

???

??????? d , ,

!! !!

( ) Kiroro 2010-08-17

23:52


>

: 40 200

40

! interest rate/ discount rate

40 200 40 $40,000

(say 10 years) 160

10 interest rate say 8% present value

160 ( 75 ) " 160 160 12 8


09:26

[MsgID #839]

<quote:Kiroro : : 40

200 40

! interest rate/ discount rate

40 200 40 $40,000

(say 10 years) 160

10 interest rate say 8% present value

160 ( 75 ) " 160 160 12 8

>

10 200 200

160 160


20 80

present value

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-18

10:21

[MsgID #840] <quote:smallkenken : 10 200 200

160 160

20 80

present value >

I guess (not sure, I haven't studied economics) Kiroro CHing means if you have 2M today. Baiscally, there is no interest for saving.

So, if you full pay 2M for such apartment, you will gain a living place. The opportunity cost will be the interest of saving which is virtually null at the moment. Assuming the apartment depreciates linearly $40k per year. Your total cost of living is $40k per year. (i.e. captial lost + opportuntity cost)

Some years later, assuming the depreciation is linear, the capital lost is still $40K per year but the opportuntity cost increased sharply. It will increase your total cost of living.

Under such situation, ppl will sell apartment back to government as the cost of living is extremely high at that point.

Theoretically, they can't gain through the plan in terms of cash. But participant can enjoy low cost of living and free to switch out when there are other more "economical opportuntity".

So, back to the original of the topic, 1. to decide suitable asset allocation is an investment decision. 2. to make suitable asset allocation to attain a lower cost of products, goods or services is a kind of gain. 3. --> make use of an investment decision to produce gain forms our economy.


10:54

[MsgID #841] <quote:henry_boyie :

I guess (not sure, I haven't studied economics) Kiroro CHing means if you have 2M today. Baiscally, there is no interest for saving.

So, if you full pay 2M for such apartment, you will gain a living place. The opportunity cost will be the interest of saving which is virtually null at the moment. Assuming the apartment depreciates linearly $40k per year. Your total cost of living is $40k per year. (i.e. captial lost + opportuntity cost)

Some years later, assuming the depreciation is linear, the capital lost is still $40K per year but the opportuntity cost increased sharply. It will

increase your total cost of living. Under such situation, ppl will sell apartment back

to government as the cost of living is extremely high at that point.

Theoretically, they can't gain through the plan in terms of cash. But participant can enjoy low cost of living and free to switch out when there

are other more "economical opportuntity".

So, back to the original of the topic, 1. to decide suitable asset allocation is an investment decision. 2. to make suitable asset allocation to attain a lower cost of products, goods or services is a kind of gain. 3. --> make use of an investment decision to produce gain forms our economy.>

50 200 10 40

40

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-18

11:37


50 200 10

40 40

>

The appartment worth $1.6M 10 yrs later. the point is if at that time interest rate rise to 8%. If you have 1.6M cash, will you buy such apartment?

If you pay 1.6M for the apartment, the opportuntity cost is you will lose $12.8K on interest income. The appartment will also depreciate 40k per year. Which gives total cost of living $16.8 per year.

Turns out, no one will take it. And the queue for such apartment you mentioned will be disappeard.

I am not disagree with your proposal. But it seems there is room for improvement.


12:07

[MsgID #843]

<quote:henry_boyie :The appartment worth $1.6M 10 yrs later. the point is if at that time interest rate

rise to 8%. If you have 1.6M cash, will you buy such apartment?



I am not disagree with your proposal. But it seems there is room for improvement.>

( ) Kiroro 2010-08-18

13:03

[MsgID #844]

<quote:smallkenken" :

10 200 200

160 160

20 80

present value >

First of all, thanks henry_boyie for his succinct explanations, which are far better than mine.


Allow me to add some remarks.

#

comment: 10 200 200

real interest rate #

comment: 160 160

10 160 ( straight line depreciation based on your

assumption)

10 interest rate say 8% present value 160

( 75 ) " 75 160

160 12 8

Yes, it is opportunity cost. As henry_boyie said, participant can enjoy low cost of living and free to

switch out when there are other more "economical opportuntity produce gain from our economy" .

comment:

20 80

# word for word appended below:

[color=#808000] 3.

40 200 40 [/color]

8 12 #775 post :

comment: present value

Present value is a simple and common way to calculate the value of an asset, no matter it is a residential property, a car, or a piece of equipment.

In what way one can evaluate whether he pays too high for the if he does not use the present

value? Use his gut feeling?

$

comment:

50 200 10 40

40

One do not need to calculate the present value if the life span is short and cost is low, like a TV (my plasma TV just broke down after using for only 6 years).

But if you want to buy a TV which costs 2 million, one has to think twice.


14:23

[MsgID #845] <quote:Kiroro :First of all, thanks henry_boyie for his succinct explanations, which are far better than

mine. Allow me to add some remarks.

#

comment: 10 200 200

real interest rate #

comment: 160 160

10 160 ( straight line depreciation based on your

assumption)

10 interest rate say 8% present value 160

( 75 ) " 75 160

160 12 8

Yes, it is opportunity cost. As henry_boyie said, participant can enjoy low cost of living and free to

switch out when there are other more "economical opportuntity produce gain from our economy" .

comment:

20 80

# word for word appended below:

[color=#808000] 3.

40 200 40 [/color]

8 12 #775 post :

comment: present value


Present value is a simple and common way to calculate the value of an asset, no matter it is a residential property, a car, or a piece of equipment. In what way one can evaluate whether he pays too high for the if he does not use the present

value? Use his gut feeling? $

comment:

50 200 10 40

40

One do not need to calculate the present value if the life span is short and cost is low, like a TV (my plasma TV just broke down after using for only 6 years). But if you want to buy a TV which costs 2 million, one has to think twice.>

present value

1.

2.

%

1.

2.

3.

1.

2. ( )

1. ( )

2.

40 100 20

:

1.

( ) :

1.

1.

( ) ckkl 2010-08-18

20:27

[MsgID #846]

( ) orato 2010-08-18

21:46

[MsgID #847] What? is wrong?

Do you mean the land sell at $1 per square foot to developers and then let them sell the units back to us at $10000 per square foot?


15:30

[MsgID #848]

( ) elephant 2010-08-19

18:38

[MsgID #849] CY Leung is the candidate for the next HKCE in 2012, his view is representative or the current bureaucrats will be sacked by 2012.

(12:15)

26 30

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-19

20:23

[MsgID #850] <quote:orato :What? is wrong?

Do you mean the land sell at $1 per square foot to developers and then let them sell the units back to us at $10000 per square foot?>

, 1 10000 la


22:25

[MsgID #851] &, , ,1.6M cash

,

<quote:henry_boyie :The appartment worth $1.6M 10 yrs later. the point is if at that time interest rate

rise to 8%. If you have 1.6M cash, will you buy such apartment?




I am not disagree with your proposal. But it seems there is room for improvement.>

( ) kiwi 2010-08-19

22:58

[MsgID #852]

<quote:elephant : (12:15)

26 30

<

>>

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-19

23:03

[MsgID #853]

<quote:bangicheng : &, , ,1.6M

cash ,

>

Exactly, as I mentioned before, the rise of property price has a very close relationship to depreciation of HKD in the past years.

1

500ft

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-19

23:11

[MsgID #854]

<quote:elephant : (12:15)

26 30

<

>>

<quote:kiwi :

>

, , ( (9-12 ) )

.

, POINT. , .

.

( ) orato 2010-08-20

01:15

[MsgID #855]

<quote:chinahk30 :

, 1 10000 la>

, developer 1 to you? Is he your father?

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-20

08:52

[MsgID #856]

<quote:orato :

, developer 1 to you? Is he your father?>

10000 , 1

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-20

09:14

[MsgID #857]

<quote:orato :

, developer 1 to you? Is he your father?>

<quote:chinahk30 :10000 , 1 >

1

( ) chinahk30 2010-08-20

13:04

[MsgID #858] <quote:henry_boyie :

1 >

, 10000 , ?

( ) 1975 2010-08-20

23:38

[MsgID #859] ( ) .

97 , " ". ,


.

, 98 , , $12K. " ",

. " ", , ,

. , .

, , ,

, . , , , .

, , 99 , ,

, $1.5K, 18 , 9%. 5%,

14%. , 3 , , , , .

01 , $15K, , . , $1.04M

300 , $728K, $300K, $12K. ( , $12k $1M ,

~80 .)

, , Grant loan, MSc , ...etc. .

, ~5K, ~3K. , SARS,

$800K-900K, " " . . , , ... , , M , $10

( ), .

SARS , , , . ,

, $1K .

07 , , 13 . , .

2 , 08 1 ( ), , $1.7M,

$700 ($500K + 200K). 1 $2.4M , . " " ,

. 7 , ~$1.2M, , $500K, ,

~$700K , . . ,

7 , , .

09 , , , , ,

, , $1.8M , ,

. . , .

, $3M, <20% . ,

.

, , , ,

, , . ,

, .

, , , ,

, , .

, .

, , 2 , , , 2

, 09 10 . , 2 , ( SARS

, 04-06 , 9 ). , ~$6K.

.

( ) kiwi 2010-08-21

12:02

[MsgID #860]

<quote:1975 : ( ) .

, , , ,

, , .

, .

, , 2 , , , 2

, 09 10 . , 2 , ( SARS

, 04-06 , 9 ). , ~$6K.

.>

1975

!

( ) jones 2010-08-21

21:33

[MsgID #861] <quote:1975 :97 , " ".

, .>

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-21

22:51

[MsgID #862] <quote:1975 :97 , " ".

, .>

<quote:jones :

>

, , .

, , .


, .

, CHing , MPF , . .

( ) hktonyma 2010-08-21

23:35

[MsgID #863] 1. ,

2. ,

3. , ,

,

, , ,

, , , ,

, , ,

, ,

, , ,

........


Question AuthorPost

datetimeContent

( ) fatbilly008 2010-08-22

00:08

[MsgID #864] , , "low cost", " middle cost" and "high cost"

, ....

, .

$3000-$4000

( ) orato 2010-08-22

13:20

[MsgID #865]

<quote:hktonyma :1. ,

2. ,

3. , ,

,

, , ,

, , , ,

, , ,

, ,

, , ,

........ >

Wrong! Property Price in western New Territories such as Tsuen Wan, Tuen Mun, Tin Shui Wai, etc., according to the Centraline Property Price Index, is still 63% of the 1997 Price (13 years ago). The property price in the area has actuary dropped almost 37% since 1997!

( ) hktonyma 2010-08-22

15:50

[MsgID #866] sorry i may wrong if u use 1997 index. But i may correct in 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 or..........................


02:09

[MsgID #867] , , , ,

, , .

d , .


07:48

[MsgID #868] /

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

( )

6.

7.

8.

9.

( )

!

10.

11.

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

4.

1. (

E3-13


)

2.

40 100

" 20

:

1.

2.

( ) :

1.

2.

:

1. 50 100 10 40

40

2. 50 100 10

40 40

,

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

( ) andycheung 2010-08-23

22:05

[MsgID #869] We think allowing those using their MPF funds as their first installment if buying their first property is a flexible and appropriate option! I think it gives one more option for the citizen to make their own choice!! Otherwise, most of them may have no hope to buy their first property!!!! Especially for those who earns between $ 20,000 and $ 30,000 per month. They are in fact not qualify to get any subsidy from the govt and it is very difficult for these income earning group to save enough money as their first instalment! I know a lot of friends need to get marry but they are unable to save enough first instalment! They are quite frusturated and hopeless now! If their MPF could only be used until they are 65 years old, it is meaningless for them because they need to form up their family now!! The government can allow those without any property to draw thier MPF as part of their first instalment for only one time until they are 65 years old. Most people I know are fully support this proposal, especially those who having worked for over 10 years but still could not buy their first property! Also, this policy is better than other loan assistance scheme as it would not add the burden for these first time home buyers to repay the loan interest.

( ) zingzing 2010-08-23

22:12

[MsgID #870]

1) , : ,

( )

2) , ,

,

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-23

22:49

[MsgID #871]

<quote:andycheung :We think allowing those using their MPF funds as their first installment if buying

their first property is a flexible and appropriate option! I think it gives one more option for the citizen to make their own choice!! Otherwise, most of them may have no hope to buy their first property!!!! Especially for those who earns between $ 20,000 and $ 30,000 per month. They are in fact not qualify to get any subsidy from the govt and it is very difficult for these income earning group to save enough money as their first instalment! I know a lot of friends need to get marry but they are unable to save enough first instalment! They are quite frusturated and hopeless now! If their MPF could only be used until they are 65 years old, it is meaningless for them because they need to form up their family now!! The government can allow those without any property to draw thier MPF as part of their first instalment for only one time until they are 65 years old. Most people I know are fully support this proposal, especially those who having worked for over 10 years but still could not buy their first property! Also, this policy is better than other loan assistance scheme as it would not add the burden for these first time home buyers to repay the loan interest.>

1. I support the idea to use MPF for first installment. 2. Or else, if the gov. can just change legistlation to allow using MPF to settle bad debt for mortage in case borrowers decides to bankrupt. It helps banks to approve mortage application or it may helps buyers to save some mortage insurance cost which turns out around 3-4% of the apartment price. 3. However, I dont understand why ppl with income 20k-30k cannot affort an apartment and need help. Many chings here pointed out <2M apartments are everywhere in N.T.

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-24

23:17

[MsgID #872] .

, , MPF 20% .

, 7 , , ( ),

3% . , .

, , MPF .


( ) orato 2010-08-25

03:52

[MsgID #873] The Hong Kong Government must be very careful before taking any action. The current low interest rate will not last forever. It could go up any time. Higer interest rate + any government action could be disastrous.

( ) bid 2010-08-25

08:44

[MsgID #874]

<quote:orato :The Hong Kong Government must be very careful before taking any action. The current

low interest rate will not last forever. It could go up any time. Higer interest rate + any government action could be disastrous. >

yes, so gov. should action before Higer interest rate and High flat price. Otherwise, any government action could be disastrous.

( ) antilaziness 2010-08-25

09:46

[MsgID #875]

<quote:bid :

yes, so gov. should action before Higer interest rate and High flat price. Otherwise, any government action could be disastrous.>

action + higher interest rate (no matter before and after) is disastrous ha ha ha

unless the government can control the interest rate

( ) hktonyma 2010-08-25

11:11

[MsgID #876] <quote:antilaziness :

unless the government can control the interest rate>

i think if government control the interest rate in high interest rate, the affect wil be bigger than 85000. Therefore, gov. just control the current supply and are enough

( ) alfred 2010-08-25

13:46

[MsgID #877] ($100) , ,

10-20 , 1,000 2,000,

, ,

, , ,

( ) alfred 2010-08-25

13:47

[MsgID #878] <quote:henry_boyie : .

, , MPF 20% .

, 7 , , ( ),

3% . , .

, , MPF .>

But will this make the house prices rise more?

( ) hktonyma 2010-08-25

16:47

[MsgID #879]

<quote:alfred :

But will this make the house prices rise more?>

alfred :

1. ,

2. MPF ,

3. 10-20 , 1,000 2,000, 2 ,

$100, , , , , ,

2 3.5%, 3 7%, 4 15%

, , , ,

,

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-25

17:00

[MsgID #880]

<quote:alfred :

But will this make the house prices rise more?>

<quote:hktonyma : alfred :

1. ,

2. MPF ,

3. 10-20 , 1,000 2,000, 2 ,

$100, , , , , ,

2 3.5%, 3 7%, 4 15%

, , , ,

, >

1.

2. MPF forget it, I am not insist.

3. a. , .

b. , . .

c. , ( ), ,

. " ", , .

( ) hktonyma 2010-08-25

17:14

[MsgID #881]


1.

2. MPF forget it, I am not insist.

3. a. , .

b. , . .

c. , ( ), ,

. " ", , .>


henry , , , ,

.

, , , , 2 2

, ,

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-25

17:19

[MsgID #882] <quote:hktonyma :henry , , , ,

.

, , , , 2 2

, , >

, , check .

( ) alfred 2010-08-25

17:42

[MsgID #883] <quote:hktonyma :

henry , , , ,

.

, , , , 2 2

, , >

,

, ,

, 2 ...

$100 2-3M , ,

, , ,

, ... ...

( ) Cheung 2010-08-25

17:55

[MsgID #884] I think the Government should not allow banks in HK to offer Hibor repayment plans as the interest is too low for the speculators. Since HK cannot control the interest rate, it would be better for our Government to ban the Hibor mortgage plan and only allow to use "P" plan (Just like the rate for buying government public housing in HK). As the interest rate in "P" plan is generally higher than Hibor rate, this is indeed equivalent to an increase in interest rate by ourself. This will reduce the investment demand for property and cool down the property market.

In order to help people to buy their "first" flat, I think the government can decide to reduce the stamp duty for first time buyers. However, at the same time, they should establish a kind of information base detailing the ownership of flats by an individual in HK. If a person want to buy the second flat for investment purpose, then they should be charged a significantly higher stamp duty. Moreover, the government should also set a higher stamp duty for those people who are not first time buyer. Therefore, this can reduce their investment demand.

Finally, a progressive "value-added tax" should be set up so as to curb the investment demand for property. The higher the number of property and individual own, the higher the tax rate they need to pay.

( ) bid 2010-08-25

18:14

[MsgID #885] yes ar, i aslo agree the above nice people said

1. ,

2. MPF ,

3. 10-20 , 1,000 2,000, 2 ,

$100, , , , , ,

2 3.5%, 3 7%, 4 15%

4. , , ,

,

( ) fireball 2010-08-25

18:25

[MsgID #886]


, , check .>

website section ...

( ) fireball 2010-08-25

18:37

[MsgID #887]

<quote:bid :yes ar, i aslo agree the above nice people said

1. ,

2. MPF ,

3. 10-20 , 1,000 2,000, 2 ,

$100, , , , , ,

2 3.5%, 3 7%, 4 15%

4. , , ,

, >

4. ,

" " , ..

o !

o d ?

( ) liz 2010-08-25

19:06

[MsgID #888]

1. ,

2. MPF ,

3. , 100 , 2 ,

$100, , , , , ,


2 3.5%, 3 7%, 4 15%

4. , , ,

, ,

( ) hktonyma 2010-08-25

20:10

[MsgID #889] <quote:liz :

1. ,

2. MPF ,

3. , 100 , 2 ,

$100, , , , , ,

2 3.5%, 3 7%, 4 15%

4. , , ,

, , >

good idea, , ,

( ) brotmann 2010-08-26

15:44

[MsgID #890] , ,

target. , . . 20-30 . 50

....

25-35-45 ,

.

9 . .

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-26

16:32

[MsgID #891] <quote:brotmann : , ,

target. , . . 20-30 . 50

....

25-35-45

, .

9 . .>

, . , .

.

( ) yanyan0511 2010-08-26

20:54

[MsgID #892] !

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-26

21:01

[MsgID #893] <quote:yanyan0511 : !>

95%wor, 12 ? , 100% .

( ) Kiroro 2010-08-26

23:41

[MsgID #894]

<quote:andycheung :We think allowing those using their MPF funds as their first installment if buying

their first property is a flexible and appropriate option! I think it gives one more option for the citizen to make their own choice!! Otherwise, most of them may have no hope to buy their first property!!!! Especially for those who earns between $ 20,000 and $ 30,000 per month. They are in fact not qualify to get any subsidy from the govt and it is very difficult for these income earning group to save enough money as their first instalment! I know a lot of friends need to get marry but they are unable to save enough first instalment! They are quite frusturated and hopeless now! If their MPF could only be used until they are 65 years old, it is meaningless for them because they need to form up their family now!! The government can allow those without any property to draw thier MPF as part of their first instalment for only one time until they are 65 years old. Most people I know are fully support this proposal, especially those who having worked for over 10 years but still could not buy their first property! Also, this policy is better than other loan assistance scheme as it would not add the burden for these first time home buyers to repay the loan interest.>

Your views:

Especially for those who earns between $ 20,000 and $ 30,000 per month I know a lot of friends

need to get marry but they are unable to save enough first instalment!

My views:

It is a mystery if a singleton, with monthly income of around $25K (i.e. midpoint of the stated range of income from $20K to $30K), is unable to save enough to meet the down payment. We all know that with the help of HKMC one has to pay only 10% of the down payment. For a decent flat of around 3 million he needs to bear the initial expenses of around $380K (down payment + stamp duty + legal fee + agency commission for a second-hand flat).

If he saves 40% of his income i.e. 10K per month (The percentage is reasonable because if he buys a flat, it is likely that he has to bear the monthly payment of 40% of his income any way), then he should have enough saving for the down payment within 4 years!

Why such people do not have enough saving? There are several possibilities:

a) he joins the workforce for less than 4 years. Why he is in a hurry to get married and buy a flat? Yes, it is his personal choice to get married so soon. But it is also unreasonable to ask tax payers to foot the bill for his personal choice!

b) He does not save enough. Because of time preference, it is only natural for ordinary mortals to spend now rather than later. But if one wants to buy a flat, he has to save. Why we tax payers have to foot the bill for his personal preference of lavish spending!

c) Because of other personal commitments (repay the grant/ loan, pocket money to parents etc.), he is unable to save enough. If it is the case, he will be unable to meet the monthly instalment.

In short, even if they can borrow from the MPF account, their cash flow will be barely enough to pay the monthly instalment. In other words, the plan will not be very helpful.

You may say, the MPF balance belongs to the owner and has nothing to do with tax payers.

How about he loses all his money because of the house mortgage burden in the wake of the burst of real estate bubble? He will not have any MPF balance and has to relied on the comprehensive social benefits when he retires. These are tax payers' money!

henry_boyie 2010-08-27 [MsgID #895]


( ) 09:14 <quote:Kiroro :Your views:


need to get marry but they are unable to save enough first instalment![/color]

My views:









How about he loses all his money because of the house mortgage burden in the wake of the burst of real estate bubble? He will not have any MPF balance and has to relied on the comprehensive social benefits when he retires. These are tax payers' money!>

I agree ALL of your points except the last one.


More positively, let's assume he will work hard and try hard to protect his home. Even he bankrupt and we hope he can pick up again after 4 yrs. And hopefully, he wont become a burden to tax payer when he retires.

My opinion is putting $$ in MPF, we'll have to pay management fee. About 2% per year, if we can get MPF out, we can save 2% management fee and save 1% mortage interest. The net difference is 3% of MPF amount per year. If he hasn't got sufficient $ for first installment, this proposal can help him to save mortage insurance as well.

Say in other words, we invest throught MPF. If we consider we can use MPF to invest on our own flat, it will be an investment decision and we can compare the risk and return for different investment opportuntity.

For HSI, it rised in the past 10 yrs. But the rise can hardly compensate the management fees for MPF. Unless we switch in/out fund to catch the wave.

For property market, it goes up and down but the big trend is it keep growing. We dont need to pay for management fees and we can save mortage interest. On the other hand, we can enjoy the "rental value" of the apartment.

Again, I think HK ppl should have a right to compare with these investment opportuntities and make an investment decision which is the most suitable for him.


10:12

[MsgID #896]

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-27

11:44

[MsgID #897]


>

I just pointed out our MPF should allow us to choose different investment opportuntity, including our own apartment.

I also pointed out it is not fair for us to keep money in MPF while paying management fees to the service provider, my case in HSBC, and on the other hand, paying mortage interest to HSBC.

It is just an idea for furth investigation/discussion.

Peronally, I think if someone got an apartment worth $5M after retirement. Such assest can well protect himself for retirement.


12:11

[MsgID #898]


>

<quote:henry_boyie :I just pointed out our MPF should allow us to choose different investment

opportuntity, including our own apartment.

I also pointed out it is not fair for us to keep money in MPF while paying management fees to the service provider, my case in HSBC, and on the other hand, paying mortage interest to HSBC.

It is just an idea for furth investigation/discussion.

Peronally, I think if someone got an apartment worth $5M after retirement. Such assest can well protect himself for retirement.>


( ) hktonyma 2010-08-27

12:19

[MsgID #899] MPF ,

, , ,

, , ,

, 3 , ,

, , , , ,

, , ,

, ,

,

, MPF ,

, 200 $100, ,

, ,

,

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-27

12:22

[MsgID #900]

<quote:hktonyma : MPF ,

>

I think it is a long term policy, even gov. allow using MPF for first installment, that doesn't mean ppl have to buy apartment now.


13:21

[MsgID #901] , 4 , 6 , 9 4

97 10%, 1%, , .


I think it is a long term policy, even gov. allow using MPF for first installment, that doesn't mean ppl have to buy apartment now.>


13:26

[MsgID #902]

<quote:bangicheng : , 4 , 6 , 9 4

97 10%, 1%, , .

>

100 ,10% , 10 , , . 800

. .

" " , 89 , 21

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-27

14:26

[MsgID #903]


97 10%, 1%, , .

100 ,10% , 10 , , . 800

. .

" " , 89 , 21 >

, , .

, " " .

H-plan mortage, 1%, H-plan mortage

2.x%.

Job data, GDP growth, unemployment rate...etc.

( ) henry_boyie 2010-08-27

14:29

[MsgID #904] <quote:bangicheng : , 4 , 6 , 9 4

97 10%, 1%, , .

100 ,10% , 10 , , . 800

. .

" " , 89 , 21 >

( ) andyhk330 2010-08-27

21:31

[MsgID #905]

1. 3

10

P+5%

2. 10

3. 300

4. 25

( ) tata 2010-08-28

16:30

[MsgID #906]



97 10%, 1%, , .

100 ,10% , 10 , , . 800

. .

" " , 89 , 21 >

, , , ,

100% ? !D , ,

5 or10 5% ( ), , ,

, !

, , , d , , ,

, ! D , ,

, !

MPF, MPF ,( : $10,000.. $1,000.. $12,000) MPF 10

, 1 7 , $2,500,1 3 ,5 15 ,2

30 ; MPF , MPF , MPF,

MPF , ! MPF ,

, ( ); 10 ,

!

D 200 , , 200 , :

1. - 451 125 ( )

2. - 587 158 ( )

3. - 600 139 ( )

4. - 600 158 ( )

5. - 476 125 ( )

6. - 538 149 ( )

7. - 515 168 ( )

8. - 452 135 ( )

( 8 28 )

, , , , , 1 ,

2 , , !

, ,

, ! , ; 2 , , 20% ,

3 10%( 30%),1 20%( 50%), , ,

, , ;

, d , ( 2003 ) , ,

!! , !

, 2 ? , 2 ; ,

2 ,D ? 3 ! , D

, ( , , )

, D , !

, , , , 3

, , ,

; ,

, 200 , d 200 ; d

, d , , , ,

: , d ?

, , ??

, , d , 85000,

, , , , ;

, , ! , , d ,

, ,d , ( ,

, 2,3 ) ? ,

, !

, 1 2 , 2

3 , , d d d ,

, ( )

/ , , ,

, , , , , d

( , )!

, :

1. , ,

2. , , 85000

3. , ,

4. , , , ,

5. , , , !

( ) Lam 2010-08-28

22:21

[MsgID #907]

1.

2.


3.


Question AuthorPost

datetimeContent

( ) ckkl 2010-08-29

12:47

[MsgID #908]

!

( ) Kiroro 2010-08-30

13:21

[MsgID #909] <quote:Kiroro :Your views:


need to get marry but they are unable to save enough first instalment![/color]

My views:









How about he loses all his money because of the house mortgage burden in the wake of the burst of real estate bubble? He will not have any MPF balance and has to relied on the comprehensive social benefits when he retires. These are tax payers' money!>

<quote:henry_boyie :I agree ALL of your points except the last one.


More positively, let's assume he will work hard and try hard to protect his home. Even he bankrupt and we hope he can pick up again after 4 yrs. And hopefully, he wont become a burden to tax payer when he retires.

My opinion is putting $$ in MPF, we'll have to pay management fee. About 2% per year, if we can get MPF out, we can save 2% management fee and save 1% mortage interest. The net difference is 3% of MPF amount per year. If he hasn't got sufficient $ for first installment, this proposal can help him to save mortage insurance as well.

Say in other words, we invest throught MPF. If we consider we can use MPF to invest on our own flat, it will be an investment decision and we can compare the risk and return for different investment opportuntity.

For HSI, it rised in the past 10 yrs. But the rise can hardly compensate the management fees for MPF. Unless we switch in/out fund to catch the wave.

For property market, it goes up and down but the big trend is it keep growing. We dont need to pay for management fees and we can save mortage interest. On the other hand, we can enjoy the "rental value" of the apartment.

Again, I think HK ppl should have a right to compare with these investment opportuntities and make an investment decision which is the most suitable for him.>

If we take a longer view (i.e. 30 or 40 years), MPF is a must for the society.

The comprehensive social security assistance (CSSA) is a large scale Ponzi Scheme, so to speak. It is because the government, like most in other countries, has not set aside any assets/ saving to meet the commitment in future. It is only supported by the prevailing tax payers.

However, as the population in Hong Kong is greying fast, obviously there will not be enough working population to support the aged in future. The only thing they can rely on is their MPF saving. Bricks (real estate) are by no means bread and it is pointless to be asset rich and cash poor. That s why MPF is

the last thing with which one should consider tampering.

Yes, the management fee of MPF trustees is high, but it is likely that the fee will fall when employees are allowed to choose their own MPF trustees rather than the employers.

Real estate is not a sure win. If we take a longer view (again) of 30 to 40 years, discounting inflation, is the attractiveness of real return on real estate real?

Robert Shiller (who co-invents the S&P Case-Shiller Home Price Indices in the US) previously asserts (sort of) that real estate is no more attractive than equities in the long term (quoted from my faded memory as I do not have his book offhand).

In short, if one has sufficient saving and adequate cash flow to pay the instalments, then go ahead to buy a flat.

E3-14


But if one has to borrow from his MPF balance to meet the down payment, and the return in 30 to

40 years is a big question mark, personally I doubt about this.

( ) liz 2010-08-30

16:42

[MsgID #910] <quote:ckkl :

!

>

, , , ,

, , , ,

, , , " ,

( ) Kiroro 2010-08-30

21:25

[MsgID #911]

<quote:ckkl :

!

>

<quote:liz : , , ,

, , , ,

, , , ,

" , >

Is there a shortage of flats? Or is it an illusion?

From the latest figures of the Rating and Valuation Department, the price index of selected popular development in the New Territories is only 119 (1999 = 100).In fact the price increase is concentrated in the urban area (the index is 152.6).

Then why people insist on urging the government to help them to buy flats in the urban area? Why they do not buy flats in the New Territories if they cannot afford those in the urban area?

It is a mystery.

( ) pdkw126 2010-08-31

14:25

[MsgID #912] <quote:henry_boyie : !

95%wor, 12 ? , 100% .>

90%... $50k ( $2m ).

, 95% ..... $15k-30k , .

7-8k , .

btw... , ....

( ) 506506 2010-08-31

15:04

[MsgID #913] . , .

. , . ,

. , . ,

, .

. , .

.

( ) syl 2010-09-01

01:02

[MsgID #914] 35 ?

( ) Raylo 2010-09-01

01:21

[MsgID #915] , ,

, 50 , , ,

,

,

( ) Forum Administrator

2010-09-01

09:25

[MsgID #916]

!

From Forum Administrator: The Public Consultation on Subsidising Home Ownership will be ended on 17 September 2010. This eForum will be closed at 00:00 hr on 18 September 2010. Please make use of the remaining time to express your views. All comments expressed on the Key Questions area will

be published in a compendium which will form part of the report on the consultation. Thank you for your support to this eForum!

( ) Kiroro 2010-09-01

12:57

[MsgID #917]

<quote:syl : 35 ?>

If we take a longer view (i.e. 30 or 40 years), maintaining adequate MPF balance is a must for the society.

The comprehensive social security assistance (CSSA) is a large scale Ponzi Scheme, so to speak. It is because the government, like most in other countries, has not set aside any assets/ saving to meet the commitment in future. It is only supported by the prevailing tax payers.

However, as the population in Hong Kong is greying fast, obviously there will not be enough working population to support the aged in future. The only thing they can rely on is their MPF saving. Bricks (real estate) are by no means bread and it is pointless to be asset rich and cash poor. That s why MPF is

the last thing with which one should consider tampering.

Yes, the management fee of MPF trustees is high, but it is likely that the fee will fall when employees are allowed to choose their own MPF trustees rather than the employers.


Real estate is not a sure win. If we take a longer view (again) of 30 to 40 years, discounting inflation, is the attractiveness of real return on real estate real?

In short, if one has sufficient saving and adequate cash flow to pay the instalments, then go ahead to buy a flat.

But if one has to borrow from his MPF balance to meet the down payment, and the return in 30 to

40 years is a big question mark. Personally I doubt about the suggestion.


19:23

[MsgID #918] , , , ,

. . ...

, , d , ,

. , ....

( ) ckkl 2010-09-01

20:05

[MsgID #919] ?

( ) kiwi 2010-09-01

22:00

[MsgID #920] <quote:506506 : . , .

. , . ,

. , . ,

, .

. , .

.>

ga

ga $1500/

( ) tonilam 2010-09-02

00:58

[MsgID #921] <quote:kiwi :

ga

ga

$1500/

>

~

( ) bid 2010-09-02

10:37

[MsgID #922] , , ,

, , , , ,

, , 9 5

, , , ,

,

, , ,

!!!

( ) Albert PK Lau 2010-09-02

12:59

[MsgID #923] , 10 ,

,

#

, , (

)

:

http://www.hkcd.com.hk/content/2010-08/ ... 583575.htm

( ) mic168 2010-09-02

15:05

[MsgID #924] ! , !! ga !!

$$ !!

To: , la .. e + ??!! , d $$ , so

!!

, $$ !! , !! 2003 d

???

! ??????? d , ,

!! !!


17:50

[MsgID #925] 5 , , ,

...

<quote:mic168 : ! , !!

ga !! $$ !!

To: , la .. e + ??!! , d $$ , so

!!


, $$ !! , !! 2003 d

???

! ??????? d , ,

!! !!

>

( ) Kiroro 2010-09-02

21:41

[MsgID #926]

<quote:Albert PK Lau : , 10 ,

,

"

, ,

( )

:


>

(6.2010)

152.6

119.0

( 1999 = 100 )

<quote:Albert PK Lau : 500

25% 30% 200 300 >

500 200 300 6000

crowds out Market positioning

<quote:Albert PK Lau :

500

>

1)

2) non-structural partition wall


10

>

1) 10

2) 10

10 3) ( )

( # )

4) ( ) $

( ) 120i 2010-09-02

23:15

[MsgID #927] ,

1.

2. ,

3. , ,

4. ,

( ) Cliff 2010-09-02

23:42

[MsgID #928] 5

( )


( ) kiwi 2010-09-03

12:58

[MsgID #929] <quote:Cliff : 5

( )

>

' '

Cliff

Cliff ? !

( ) henry_boyie 2010-09-03

13:26

[MsgID #930] <quote:Albert PK Lau : , 10 ,

,

"

, ,

( )

:

http://www.hkcd.com.hk/content/2010-08/ ... 583575.htm>

, " " ,

, ?

( ) henry_boyie 2010-09-03

13:31

[MsgID #931] "Albert PK Lau" "Kiroro"

<quote:Albert PK Lau : , 10 ,

,

"

, ,

( )

:


>

<quote:Kiroro :

(6.2010)

152.6

119.0

( 1999 = 100 )

>

<quote:Albert PK Lau : 500

25% 30% 200 300 >

<quote:Kiroro :

500 200 300 6000

crowds out Market positioning

>


500

>

<quote:Kiroro :

1)

2) non-structural partition wall

>


10


>

<quote:Kiroro :

1) 10

2) 10

10 3) ( )

( # )

4) ( ) $

>

( ) Albert PK Lau 2010-09-03

15:54

[MsgID #932]

(1)

;

(2)

?

(3)

;

(4)


16:29

[MsgID #933] <quote:Albert PK Lau :

(1)

;

(2)

?

(3)

;

(4) >

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

( ) fireball 2010-09-03

18:39

[MsgID #934]


(1)

;

(2)

?

(3)

;

(4) >

" " , ,

d d " "o ..

fax payer o , o

1$ ...

sure ... ?

apply ...??

d....

( ) fireball 2010-09-03

18:46

[MsgID #935]

<quote:Cliff : 5

( )

>

... 24 ... 72 ...

.... ....

( ) kiwi 2010-09-03

19:31

[MsgID #936] <quote:Albert PK Lau :

(1)

;

(2)

?


(3)

;

(4) >

?


19:38

[MsgID #937] xx ,

<quote:kiwi : ?

>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://paper.wenweipo.com [2010-09-01] (0)

( ) henry_boyie 2010-09-03

22:50

[MsgID #938]


(1)

;

(2)

?

(3)

;

(4) >

<quote:kiwi : ?

>

Kiwi , . Albert Lau , ,

, , .

.

, , , .

1. " " , , .

, , .

2. , , ,

.

3. ?

, .

( ) henry_boyie 2010-09-03

22:52

[MsgID #939]

<quote:Cliff : 5

( )

>

, 08/09 ? Tax payers pay for your wrong decision?

( ) tonilam 2010-09-04

00:53

[MsgID #940]

<quote:Cliff : 5

( )

>

!!!


12:07

[MsgID #941]

<quote:tonilam : !!!>

, ,

( ) orato 2010-09-04

15:00

[MsgID #942] All companies which are not 100% own by Hong Kong ID Permanent Resident ID holders should be forbidden to buy any thing in Hong Kong! OK!?

( ) kiwi 2010-09-04

20:00

[MsgID #943]

<quote:henry_boyie :Kiwi , . Albert Lau ,

, , , .

.>

ga

ga ! ? ? ! ga

ckkl 2010-09-04


( ) 23:07 [MsgID #944] ?

( ) ckkl 2010-09-04

23:28

[MsgID #945]

"


Question AuthorPost

datetimeContent

( ) unclesam 2010-09-05

09:11

[MsgID #946] ?

?

!

/

( ) unclesam 2010-09-05

09:43

[MsgID #947] ,

, , , ,

, , ( ).. ,

, , &^(*&^&^%&*%

1 , o 1 , ,

<quote:bid : , , ,

, , , , ,

, , 9 5

, , , ,

,

, , ,

!!!>

( ) unclesam 2010-09-05

10:05

[MsgID #948] , ( , )

.

, ?

o , , ?

, o , (

)

?( , )

, o , ,

, ,


11:29

[MsgID #949]

( ) LEUNG 2010-09-05

14:15

[MsgID #950]

1)2000

?

2)

( ) kiwi 2010-09-05

18:04

[MsgID #951] <quote:unclesam : ? ?

!

/

>

e.g.

e.g.

3-5

?

( ) kiwi 2010-09-05

19:28

[MsgID #952]


>

E3-15


( ) ckkl 2010-09-05

21:43

[MsgID #953]

!

( ) mic168 2010-09-06

00:46

[MsgID #954] ! , !! ga !!

$$ !!

To: , la .. e + ??!! , d $$ , so

!!

, $$ !! , !! 2003 d

???

" ??????? d , ,

!! !!

( ) Forum Administrator

2010-09-06

00:53

[MsgID #955]

!

From Forum Administrator: The Public Consultation on Subsidising Home Ownership will be ended on 17 September 2010. This eForum will be closed at 00:00 hr on 18 September 2010. Please make use of the remaining time to express your views. All comments expressed on the Key Questions area will

be published in a compendium which will form part of the report on the consultation. Thank you for your support to this eForum!

( ) alfred 2010-09-06

12:20

[MsgID #956]

<quote:mic168 : ! , !!

ga !! $$ !!

To: , la .. e + ??!! , d $$ , so

!!

, $$ !! , !! 2003 d

???

" ??????? d , ,

!! !!

>

but do you agree that the developers earn a lot of money because of this. We earn 20 years money for developers.


10:57

[MsgID #957] , , .

, .

( ), ,

. ( , ,

)

, D , , ,

, , , ,

, , " " , ,

2 , , , 2500

( ) 2010-09-08

12:36

[MsgID #958] 576 136 507 85

http://property.mpfinance.com/cfm/pa3.c ... 1/lad1.txt

?

:

1. capital gain 3

2.

3.

( ) fywonga 2010-09-09

16:47

[MsgID #959]

[


]

( ) fywonga 2010-09-09

16:58

[MsgID #960]

:-

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

6)

7)

8)

9)

10)

11)

12)

13) .

14)

( ) fireball 2010-09-09

20:17

[MsgID #961] <quote:fywonga :

:-

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

6)

7)

8)

9)


10)

11)

12)

13) .

14)

>

? , d o

o ?

, ! 1949


02:17

[MsgID #962]

break promise, ?

,

( ) hero? 2010-09-10

07:14

[MsgID #963]

( ) mic168 2010-09-10

10:05

[MsgID #964] ! , !! ga !!

$$ !!

To: , la .. e + ??!! , d $$ , so

!!

, $$ !! , !! 2003 d

???

??????? d , ,

!! !!

Update Example : http://hk.realestate.yahoo.com/100909/302/3xaal.html

SHIT !!!!

( ) mic168 2010-09-10

10:07

[MsgID #965] AND

, $$ !! , !! 2003 d

???

( ) alfred 2010-09-10

10:43

[MsgID #966] <quote:mic168 : AND

, $$ !! , !! 2003 d

???

>

...


16:35

[MsgID #967] , 2 ( 1 , ),

, 700 10 , 7 , 3

...

, , 40 , .

, , ?

<quote:mic168 : AND

, $$ !! , !! 2003 d

???

>

( ) suidim 2010-09-11

02:13

[MsgID #968]

/ , .


( ) 3 , /

, .

, ( 3 )

, , 3 .

( ) tata 2010-09-11

17:56

[MsgID #969] !

?

( ) moviepostcard

2010-09-11

21:29

[MsgID #970]

5 ~~~


Question AuthorPost

datetimeContent


00:01

[MsgID #971] =

( ) henry_boyie 2010-09-12

09:58

[MsgID #972]

<quote:moviepostcard :

5 ~~~>

, 10 , 20 , " " ,

. 10 , , ,

.

5 , 10 .


13:02

[MsgID #973] , , 2 ,

" " .

, , , .

, , , .

2 , 7% ,

( ) ponychan 2010-09-12

13:21

[MsgID #974] 1) ( , 2 )

2) , DEMAND ,

3) , , 2


16:33

[MsgID #975]

<quote:bangicheng : , , 2 ,

" " .

, , , .

, , , .

2 , 7% , >

( ) ywlamsam 2010-09-13

09:18

[MsgID #976] < >

1. ?

2.

( 5-6%) 50%

3.

1.

1997-2003

97,

2.

(

) 1

3.

a.

b.

c.

d.

e. 2 5 4

f.

g.

4.

a.

b.

c.

E3-16


d.

e.

10-20%

SAM LAM


09:33

[MsgID #977] , ,


>

( ) fireball 2010-09-13

10:20

[MsgID #978] <quote:ponychan :1) ( , 2

)

2) , DEMAND ,

3) , , 2

>

20100o ??

( ) fireball 2010-09-13

10:26

[MsgID #979] <quote:moviepostcard :

5 ~~~>

, o ! 8 5

o d ..


11:01

[MsgID #980] . ,

,


11:08

[MsgID #981]


11:24

[MsgID #982] insult , ,

, , ?

, , .

( ) dorothyng 2010-09-13

11:54

[MsgID #983] , ,

,

, ,

, .

, ,

, , , , , ,

, , , ,

, , ,

!

, , , .

.

,

- ,

- ,

- ,

- ,

-

-

-


14:42


>

<quote:bangicheng : , ,

>


14:58

[MsgID #985]


16:34

[MsgID #986] " ", d , ,

, , ?

, , ,

, , ... ?



16:39

[MsgID #987]

( ) bkwan 2010-09-13

18:53

[MsgID #988] , , !

( ) fireball 2010-09-13

19:27

[MsgID #989]

<quote:bkwan : , , !>

d ? d ? o , d

d d , ...

( ) emilyemily 2010-09-13

20:33

[MsgID #990]

500 2 ,

.

( ) CLA 2010-09-13

21:56

[MsgID #991] , , 95%

MPF

( ) hk123456hk 2010-09-13

22:51

[MsgID #992] ( 20%) (

)


23:04

[MsgID #993]

<quote:hk123456hk : ( 20%) (

) >

( ) napis 2010-09-14

12:34

[MsgID #994] ...

...

d

(1-2%) 8 9 ( 5 ) (

)... ...

1) 25-40 ( , , d

, ) ;

2) 50% ( 2-5% );

3) ( 3M or 4M, )

4) ,

5) ( ,

),

6)

...

!! !!

HKMC !!! !!!


13:15

[MsgID #995]

<quote:napis : ...

...

d

(1-2%) 8 9 ( 5 ?)

( )... ...

1) 25-40 ( , , d

, ) ;

2) 50% ( 2-5% );

/

3) ( 3M or 4M, )

4) ,

5) ( ,

),

$30010

6)

...

!! !!

HKMC !!! !!!>

( ) OneOfMiddleClass

2010-09-14

14:23


>

<quote:bkwan : , , !>


<quote:fireball : d ? d ? o ,

d

d d , ...>

smallkenken

d ,


14:28

[MsgID #997]

<quote:OneOfMiddleClass : smallkenken

d ,

>


14:39

[MsgID #998] , , ,


>

( ) napis 2010-09-14

14:40

[MsgID #999]

<quote:napis : ...

...

d

(1-2%) 8 9 ( 5 ?

?? ....

, offset )

1) 25-40 ( , , d

, ) ;

2) 50% ( 2-5% );

/

/

3) ( 3M or 4M, )

[ ?? ....

4) ,

?? set D,

5) ( ,

),

$30010

.... $14500

d ... ??

6)

...

?? ?

......

!! !!

HKMC !!! !!!>

.... ...

....


14:49

[MsgID #1000]

<quote:napis :

.... ...

....>


1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

!

( )

6.

7.

8.

9.

( )

"

10.

11.

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

( )

2.

40 100 # 20

:

1.

2.

( ) :

1.

2.

:

1. 50 100 10 40

40

2. 50 100 10

40 40


,

= ( )

= (

)

= ( )

= ( )

1. ( )

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7. 50 50

!

8. 50

9.

10.

( )

(

)


2010-09-14

19:52

[MsgID #1001]


>

50% 40% 30%


2010-09-14

20:49


1.

( )

2.

40 100 " 20

>

40 100 "


20 ?

?

( )

?


22:56

[MsgID #1003] <quote:OneOfMiddleClass :

50 40 10

10 1/5

40 100 "

20 ?

?

( )

?

9 :

>


23:18

[MsgID #1004]

<quote:OneOfMiddleClass :

50% 40% 30%

>


00:11

[MsgID #1005] , , .

" ", , , , ,

, ...

, , .

.


2010-09-15

09:46

[MsgID #1006]


50 40 10

10 1/5

40 100 "

20 ?

?

( )

?

9 :

>

?


09:58



?

>

:

1. 50 100 10 40

40

2. 50 100 10

40 40

!

9


2010-09-15

10:11


>

" X "


10:16

[MsgID #1009]


>

<quote:OneOfMiddleClass : " X "

>

10

( )

(

)


2010-09-15

10:32

[MsgID #1010]


:

1. 50 100 10 40

40

2. 50 100 10

40 40

!

9

>

!


10:40



! >


2010-09-15

10:56


10

( )

(

)

>

?


11:09

[MsgID #1013]


?

>


2010-09-15

11:40

[MsgID #1014]


>

( )

?


11:58


( )

?>


2010-09-15

13:27

[MsgID #1016]


>

( )


13:50

[MsgID #1017]


( )

>

!

[ ]

[ ]

70


15:41


?


>


>

3

( ) kk1200 2010-09-15

15:52

[MsgID #1019] 600-800 (2-3 ) 85%

300 20


2010-09-15

17:42


!

[ ]

[ ]

70

>


17:53

[MsgID #1021]


>


18:05


>


>

A A A B

B A B A


18:15

[MsgID #1023] , 200 .

, , . ,

, .

( ) vicki852 2010-09-15

19:14

[MsgID #1024] 1.Tax benefits for rent paid by young families 2.Refund their taxes paid for last ten years when they first purchase a house. 3. First time house buyers - exempt stamp duty and lower interest rates.

( ) bkwan 2010-09-15

19:23

[MsgID #1025] Strongly agree on the following measures:

1

2

#

3 $

%

1

2

( ) fank 2010-09-15

20:03

[MsgID #1026] Government can continue to lease public housing to those people who cannot afford to buy a flat. Just speed up with the building of public housing to resolve the problem.

Subsidising people to buy flats only create unfairness and pushing the housing prices further. A short booming and then followed by a bust.

If government was to subsidise people to buy flats, it should be every HK permanent residents who should be entitled to this benefit, not only those who have no flats on hands. Mind you, for those who already own a flat, they might be those who bear most salaries taxes and enjoy least government welfare schemes! I am sure I will be the one.

Also, unfair housing subsidising schemes will only stimulate middle classes to come out to shout at the government. I really would refuse to pay taxes and try every means to see if there is any way to sue government for creating any unfair policy. Thanks.

( ) helloha 2010-09-15

20:42

[MsgID #1027]


( ) helloha 2010-09-15

20:44

[MsgID #1028] <quote:fank :Government can continue to lease public housing to those people who cannot afford to

buy a flat. Just speed up with the building of public housing to resolve the problem.



Also, unfair housing subsidising schemes will only stimulate middle classes to come out to shout at the government. I really would refuse to pay taxes and try every means to see if there is any way to sue government for creating any unfair policy. Thanks.>

AGREE!

( ) henry_boyie 2010-09-15

22:31

[MsgID #1029]

<quote:fank :Government can continue to lease public housing to those people who cannot afford to

buy a flat. Just speed up with the building of public housing to resolve the problem.



Also, unfair housing subsidising schemes will only stimulate middle classes to come out to shout at the government. I really would refuse to pay taxes and try every means to see if there is any way to sue government for creating any unfair policy. Thanks.>

support to sue the gov. for such unfair policy.

( ) fibiwong 2010-09-16

00:03

[MsgID #1030] , ,

,

, ,

( ) , ,

, , d

( ) Emme 2010-09-16

09:10

[MsgID #1031]


09:11

[MsgID #1032] 2 /


10:07

[MsgID #1033]

( ) nonolau 2010-09-16

12:42

[MsgID #1034] , , , ,

.

, , ,

,

, ,

,


2010-09-16

13:40

[MsgID #1035]

(

)

!

!



13:53


(

)

!

!

>

4

( ) makmarcolism

2010-09-16

15:20

[MsgID #1037]


15:23

[MsgID #1038]

<quote:makmarcolism :

>

( ) louise 2010-09-16

17:46

[MsgID #1039] 1) ,

, / , . ,

.. , . /

.

2) , , .

3) ,

, , , ,

, .

4) ( )/ / , . ,

.

5) / .

6) , ,

....


17:56

[MsgID #1040] <quote:louise :1) ,

, / , . ,

.. , . /

.


2) , , .

3) ,

, , , ,

, .

4) ( )/ / , . ,

.

5) / .

6) , ,

....>

( ) louise 2010-09-16

17:58

[MsgID #1041] , ,

, ,

... , , 2 ,

, , ... , ,

...

.. .... , ...

( ) louise 2010-09-16

18:00

[MsgID #1042] ... , ....

d ...


18:02

[MsgID #1043]

<quote:louise : , ,

, ,

... , , 2 ,

, , ... ,

, ...

.. .... , ...>

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

"

( )

6.

7.

8.

9.

( )

#

10.

11.

1.

2.

3.


1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

( )

2.

40 100 $ 20

:

1.

2.

( ) :

1.

2.

:

1. 50 100 10 40

40

2. 50 100 10

40 40

,

= ( )

= (

)

= ( )

= ( )

1. ( )

2.

3.

4.

5. %

6.

7. 50 50

&

8. 50

9.

%

%

10.


( )

(

) %

( ) louise 2010-09-16

18:04

[MsgID #1044]

<quote:nonolau : , , , ,

.

, , ,

,

, ,

, >

~~

( ) .

( ) louise 2010-09-16

18:17

[MsgID #1045]

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

"

( )

6.

7.

8.

9.

( )

#

10.

11.

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

( )

2.


40 100 $ 20

:

1.

2.

( ) :

1.

2.

:

1. 50 100 10 40

40

2. 50 100 10

40 40

,

= ( )

= (

)

= ( )

= ( )

1. ( )

2.

3.

4.

5. %

6.

7. 50 50

&

8. 50

9.

%

%

10.

( )

(

) %

[/quote]

.~~>>> (

)

d , ...


... ...

( ) JoeJoeJoeJoe

2010-09-16

21:12

[MsgID #1046] I think Home Ownership Scheme is the scheme consider to re-launch. It provide chance for those having low income to purchase their own house at a lower price. So they don't need to worry about escalation of rental fee as now. However, I think these flat under Home Ownership Scheme should be restricted to re-sale ONLY to the population who fulfilled the entry requirement of the scheme. So that these flats will only provide housing for who unable to buy a flat in private sector. It also fair to those tax-payer. We are not going to provide a scheme for people to earn money under the scheme. I think the government should re-sale of the flats under HOS to private sector as Green form.

( ) JoeJoeJoeJoe

2010-09-16

21:33

[MsgID #1047] I don't think subsidising the downpayment is the ideal way. It will further push up the price of private housing. It is a way to push the people to the limit. Because the people actually put on 100% mortgage. Any fluctuation of the price of flat will make them as " ". I also think that if they

can't afford 5-10% of downpayment, they are not stable enough to make a decision to buy a several million dollars flat.

( ) hkhlho 2010-09-16

21:41

[MsgID #1048]

,

( ) hktonyma 2010-09-16

21:58

[MsgID #1049] , , ,

, , , ,

, , ,

, , , , , ,

, ,

10 5 , , , ,

, , , , ,

, ,

, , ,

( ) kiwi 2010-09-16

22:33

[MsgID #1050] <quote:fibiwong : , ,

,

, ,

( ) , ,

, , d >

( ) hkhlho 2010-09-16

22:59

[MsgID #1051] - ( )

( ) tata 2010-09-16

23:49

[MsgID #1052]

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

( )

6.

7.

8.

9.

( )

!

10.

11.


1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

( )

( )

2.

40 100 " 20

, ,

, ?( , 800 300 ,50 5000 ,

4000 ? ! )

:

1.

( , 8 5 ,

? , ?)

2.

( , ,

? , ?)

( ) :

1.

2.

:

1. 50 100 10 40

40

( 10 , ? ,

?( )

2. 50 100 10

40 40

,

= ( )

= (

)

= ( )

= ( )

1. ( )

( " "

? , )

2.

( ? , (

))

3.

( ? ! )

4.


5. #

6.

(

20 , , ,

, )

7. 50 50

$

8. 50

9.

#

#

( , 2007 2010 , 50%, #

, , )

10.

( )

(

) #

[/quote]

:

1. , , , ,

, / , 50

0 , ?

2. , D , 200 ,200 50

3333 , , : ,

( ), ; , :200 30

5555 , ( =

), 25 ,30 55 , 50 75 , ??

, , 5

, & (http://www.housingauthority.gov.hk/b5/a ...

17,00.html) ( )

(2010/2011 3 ) (2010/2011 84 )

22,320 630,000 *

34,980 980,000 *

39,390 1,110,000 *

48,210 1,350,000

56,100 1,580,000

,1 22,320

, ,

30% , , , ,

D ; ( )

(1 22,320 ? 15,000 !

D , , D,

(http://www.hkhs.com/chi/business/rentapply.asp)

( ) kittoys 2010-09-17

00:19

[MsgID #1053] , .

( ) Mrlai 2010-09-17

00:55

[MsgID #1054]

1) , ,

/ , . , ..

, . /

.

2) , , .

3) ,

, , .

4) ( )/ / , . ,

.

5) / .

( ) smallpotato 2010-09-17

00:57

[MsgID #1055] get reference from South Korea to see how the govt helps people to buy house


01:26

[MsgID #1056]

<quote:tata :

1.

2.


3.

4.

5.

( )

6.

7.

8.

9.

( )

!

10.

11.

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

( )

( )

2.

40 100 " 20

, ,

, ?( , 800 300 ,50 5000 ,

4000 ? ! )

800 300 ?200

:

1.

( , 8 5 ,

? , ?)

2.

( , ,

? , ?)

( ) :

1.

2.

:


1. 50 100 10 40

40

( 10 , ? ,

?( )

2. 50 100 10

40 40

,

= ( )

= (

)

= ( )

= ( )

1. ( )

( " "

? , )

2.

( ? , (

))

3.

( ? ! )

4.

5. #

6.

(

20 , , ,

, )

7. 50 50

$

8. 50

9.

#

#

( , 2007 2010 , 50%, #

, , ) #

#

10.

( )

(

) #

>

:

1. , , , ,

, / , 50

0 , ?

[color=#FF40BF]

2. , D , 200 ,200 50


3333 , , : ,

( ), ; , :200 30

5555 , ( =

), 25 ,30 55 , 50 75 , ??[/color]

, , 5

, & (http://www.housingauthority.gov.hk/b5/a ...

17,00.html) [color=#FF40BF]

( )

(2010/2011 3 ) (2010/2011 84 )

22,320 630,000 *

34,980 980,000 *

39,390 1,110,000 *

48,210 1,350,000

56,100 1,580,000

,1 22,320

, ,

30% , , , ,

D ; ( )

(1 22,320 ? 15,000 !

D , , D,

(http://www.hkhs.com/chi/business/rentapply.asp)[/color][/quote]

( ) 2010-09-17

14:42

[MsgID #1057]

<quote:smallpotato :get reference from South Korea to see how the govt helps people to buy house>

Do you got info or link for that?


14:44

[MsgID #1058]

[ ]

( ) Bon 2010-09-17

15:42

[MsgID #1059] ,

5-10% .


15:54

[MsgID #1060] /

( ) louise 2010-09-17

16:01

[MsgID #1061] , , ....

, , , ,

.... ...

, ....

... ....

, , ....

, , .....

... , ....

, .. ...

..


2010-09-17

16:10

[MsgID #1062] <quote:smallkenken :2.

40 100

20

, ,

, ?( , 800 300 ,50 5000 ,

4000 ? ! )

800 300 ?200


>

800 300 50 ( )


16:11

[MsgID #1063]

<quote:louise : , , ....

, , , ,

.... ...

, ....

... ....

, , ....

, , .....

... , ....

, .. ...

..>

!

( ) fireball 2010-09-17

16:26

[MsgID #1064] <quote:louise : , , ....

, , , ,

.... ...

, ....

... ....

, , ....

, , .....

... , ....

, .. ...

..>

o ...london, new york, d ?

check d d, ?

? d

d ,

! !

d ! ,

!!!

( ) louise 2010-09-17

16:34

[MsgID #1065]

<quote: :

! >

, ~~ ,

, .. , 30%

, ( , ).(

, ..) ,

, ???. ....

.. ...


16:42

[MsgID #1066] <quote:louise :

, ~~ ,

, .. , 30%

, ( , ).(

, ..) ,

, ???. ....

.. ...>

( ) louise 2010-09-17

16:47


o ...london, new york, d ?

check d d, ?

? d

d ,

! !

d ! ,

!!!>

, , , ( ), 1 ,

, , , ,

! , ..

, .. ...

( ) louise 2010-09-17

16:49


>


..

...

( ) fireball 2010-09-17

16:53

[MsgID #1069] <quote:louise :

, ~~ ,

, .. , 30%

, ( , ).(

, ..) ,

, ???. ....

.. ...>

game ma, ! d d

!

10% !

d , d... ! ,

d

( ) louise 2010-09-17

16:54

[MsgID #1070] , ( )

.. .....


16:56

[MsgID #1071]

<quote:louise : ..

...>

( ) louise 2010-09-17

16:57

[MsgID #1072] <quote:fireball : game ma, ! d d

!

10% !

d , d... ! ,

d >

, ...

20% , ...

( ) louise 2010-09-17

16:59

[MsgID #1074] [quote="smallkenken]

[/quote]

~ ,

~~ ~


16:59

[MsgID #1073]

<quote:louise : , ...

20% , ...>

20%

20%

( ) louise 2010-09-17

17:01

[MsgID #1075] [quote="smallkenken[/quote]

20%

20% [/quote]

.. ....


17:10

[MsgID #1076]

<quote:louise : .. ....>

( ) fireball 2010-09-17

17:10

[MsgID #1077]

<quote:louise :

, , , ( ), 1 ,

, , , ,

! , ..

, .. ...>

, ! ,

07 ?? d ??

jetso

? ? !

, o

packet R

! ,


, d ! free lunch

, ok fill up d

( ) louise 2010-09-17

17:16

[MsgID #1078] [/quote]

, ! ,

07 ?? d ??

jetso

? ? !

, o

packet R

! ,

, d ! free lunch

, ok fill up d

[/quote]

, , ...

, , ..

~~


17:17

[MsgID #1079]

<quote:louise : ~ ,

~~ ~>

/

( ) louise 2010-09-17

17:18

[MsgID #1080] <quote: : , !

,

07 ?? d ??

jetso

? ? !

, o

packet R

! ,

, d ! free lunch

, ok fill up d

>

, d ~~

..

( ) fireball 2010-09-17

17:26


20%

20% >

20% 20% , sad but true o !

05 ,

d o

( ) fireball 2010-09-17

17:29

[MsgID #1082]

<quote:louise :

, d ~~

..>

!

!


17:32

[MsgID #1083]


2010-09-17

17:33

[MsgID #1084]

<quote:smallkenken :2.

40 100

20

, ,

, ?( , 800 300 ,50 5000 ,

4000 ? ! )

800 300 ?200

>

<quote:OneOfMiddleClass : 800 300 50


( ) >

100 50

( ) fireball 2010-09-17

17:40

[MsgID #1085]

<quote:louise :

.. ....>

, plan !

d d o , d !

d o .. hk id

( ) 2010-09-17

17:41

[MsgID #1086] <quote:OneOfMiddleClass :2.

40 100

20

, ,

, ?( , 800 300 ,50 5000 ,

4000 ? ! )

800 300 ?200

>

<quote:OneOfMiddleClass : 800 300 50

( )

100 50 >

la!

goodbye!


20:39

[MsgID #1087] , , ( , ).

, " " , 100 ,

, 10000 ,

5 , " " . .

( ) hkn 2010-09-17

22:25

[MsgID #1088]

2.5

---

1200

( ) ericchan1025 2010-09-17

22:47

[MsgID #1089] .

, , , .

# :

# :

1. , , .

.

, , ,

2. ( , ), , .

.

3. . . ,

, , .

, .

7 , .

.

4. . .

,

.

5. 5-10 , , , .


22:50

[MsgID #1090]

[ ]


( ) tonychanhk 2010-09-17

22:54

[MsgID #1091] " " , " " .

, ,

, , : " , ", ,

, , ,

, !

( ) dtm 2010-09-17

22:57

[MsgID #1092] " " ,

, , . " " ,

, . ,

, , .

, , . , ,

" " , , .

, , .

, , , .

, . ,

.

, , , ,

.

, , , ,

. - ,

, . , , .

( ) Amuro 2010-09-17

23:04

[MsgID #1093]

( ) chichi 2010-09-17

23:08

[MsgID #1094]

( ) samtsui 2010-09-17

23:09

[MsgID #1095] Dear Sir

1. The money assist them should be in low interest rate. 2. To assit them according to their salaries base. 3. The flat should not be larger than 300-400 ft for example for a couple . Or 400-500ft for a couple with a child etc.... It is unreasonable for a couple choosing a 1000ft flat but need to get the benefit from the government and the tax payer !!! 4. The government should encourage the people shifting to the New Territaries or outside the centre of the city because it is unreasonable that they want the government gives them the benefit but insist in staying in the city centre. It is unfair for the tax payer.

Sam

Sam


23:20

[MsgID #1096]

( ) hkdior2626 2010-09-17

23:32

[MsgID #1097]

,


23:37

[MsgID #1098]

<quote:hkdior2626 :

,

>


23:46

[MsgID #1099]

( )

[ ]


( ) luvrab 2010-09-17

23:49

[MsgID #1100] . .

.


23:50

[MsgID #1101]

<quote:luvrab : . .

.>

( ) 2010-09-17

23:51

[MsgID #1102] , , ,

,

, , , , ,

, !!! , ,

, , .

, ? ?


23:54

[MsgID #1103] <quote: : , , ,

,

, , , , ,

, !!! , ,

, , .

, ? ?>


Question Author Post Content E3-09 datetime 2010-07-26 02:22e3-09-e3-16).pdf · 2017-12-07 ·...

Documents

Transcript of Question Author Post Content E3-09 datetime 2010-07-26 02:22e3-09-e3-16).pdf · 2017-12-07 ·...