Paramount buys land in Batu Kawan to build university college and mixed development

PETALING JAYA: Paramount Corp Bhd has purchased 30 acres of freehold land in Batu Kawan, Penang for RM67mil from Penang Development Corp (PDC) to build a university college and mixed development project

The land for the future KDU College Penang was priced at RM40.50 per sq ft while the land for the proposed mixed development was priced at RM55 per sq ft. It is located 5 minutes from the Second Penang Bridge at Bandar Cassia, a new township in Province Wellesley.

Under the agreement, Paramount will build Penang’s first university metropolis in Batu Kawan. The metropolis will be developed by Paramount Property, the property development arm of Paramount, and will be anchored by a new purpose-built campus for KDU Penang, owned by Paramount’s KDU Education Group.

The acquisition will be funded through internally generated funds and bank borrowings.

“In addition, Paramount is required to complete and commence the development of the education component within 5 years. It is also required to complete the integrated development within 10 years, both from the agreement date. It is to obtain all approvals from relevant authorities and complete the development at its own cost,” Paramount said in a statement.

Paramount told Bursa that the rationale for the deal is to increase the group’s land bank at locations with strong growth potential and to strengthen the group’s long-term sustainability by synergising the two core businesses of property development and provision of educational services.

The deal is in line with PDC’s policy to promote and sell land to attract catalyst projects in Bandar Cassia, and to provide services that will help complement the area’s industrial and housing development sectors. - The Star

House prices expected to stabilise as a result of measures

PROPERTY professionals, especially developers, continue to grumble about the challenging first six months of this year as a result of various government and banking measures kicking in with some developers delaying launches to the second half of the year.

A survey by the Real Estate and Housing Developers’ Association (Rehda) reveals that 87% of 150 respondents are “pessimistic or neutral” about the first half of the year.

While the situation may indeed be in a flux for some developers, especially the smaller ones as buyers turn cautious, all is not lost when one considers the big picture.

In an earlier seminar on the property sector, Valuation and Property Services Department deputy director-general Faizan Abdul Rahman said house prices were expected to stabilise as a result of these measures. He was speaking at the 7th Malaysian Property Summmit 2014 organised by the Association of Valuers,Property Managers, Estate Agents and Property Consultants in the Private Sector Malaysia late last month.

The distress among developers is understandable. Because of Malaysians’ general interest in this sub-segment, developers have focused on meeting this demand over the years. This focus on the residential market escalated considerably between 2010 and 2013, accounting for multiple launches among developers.

Faizan said residentials formed the bulk of transactions for the first nine months of last year, or 64% of about 280,000 transactions. In terms of value, it accounted for RM51.51bil of total value amounting to RM105.7bil, or 49%.

Faizan said the residential sub-segment would continue to drive the market in the months ahead with prices moving on a more even and moderate keel.

One of the speakers, property consultancy C H Williams Talhar & Wong managing director Foo Gee Jen said that looking ahead, property investment would continue to be relatively more popular than other forms of investments with rising demand for affordable housing.

“Genuine demand will lead the market. There will be no more double-digit price increases,” he said.

Analysing prices for the first nine months of 2013, Foo said serviced apartments had the highest price on a per square foot basis at RM609 per sq ft while terraced housing were the lowest, at RM327 per sq ft.

“In the landed segment, he said most prices had doubled over the years. Bandar Utama’s double storey housing was priced at RM280 per sq ft in 2005. It was RM620 per sq ft in 2013. The overall landed sector had average percentage increase of 8% between 2005 and 2010 but hit 18% a year for three consecutive years between 2011 and 2013.”

He came to this conclusion after analysing prices in Taman Tun Dr Ismail, Bandar Utama, Bukit Jelutong, Kota Kemuning and Bandar Kinrara.

Foo said gated and guarded housing experienced the greatest increase, averaging 10% between 2005 and 2012 with selected developments having a higher annual appreciation of 14.4%. Detached houses had the highest return at 27.2% per annum followed by semi-detached houses at 17.3%.

“Gated and guarded housing was introduced into the Malaysian market more than 10 years ago. In 2013, this segment outperformed the rest of the other types of housing. In 2005, a detached house in a gated and guarded community was RM600 per sq ft (2013: RM1,200 per sq ft), a semi-detached house was RM400 per sq ft in 2005, doubling to RM975 per sq ft last year,” he added.

Terraced housing averaged RM480 per sq ft in 2005 and increased to RM600 per sq ft last year, he said.

As for the condominium market, Foo said total stock had grown considerably over the years and as at 2013, there was more than 355,000 units. Of this, about 27,000 units are luxury condominiums. He did not defined what he considered as a luxury condominium.

Foo said: “The supply of luxury condominiums grew at an average rate of 20% a year between 2008 and 2013 with a vacancy rate of 25%.” He cautioned that more than 32,000 units are expected by the end of this year.

“It will be a challenging market for developers in 2014. Residential property market is expected to cool down, prices stable and secondary sales slow,” he said.

The trend for developers to seek development in fringe areas continue to escalate with developers now building in areas with a radius of about 40km away from the city centre.

Mah Sing Group Bhd is building M Residences in Rawang and Southville City in Bangi. In Shah Alam, Sime Darby group is development the Elmina township andIJM Land Bhd in Bandar Rimbayu. Puchong and Semenyih have the highest concentration of new launches.

With affordability being the main issue the last few years, Foo says this is expected to change with the government’s programme on affordable housing. The government aims to build 300,000 units of affordable housing for the next five years, of 60,000 units a year. - The Star

Consumer confidence props up residential market

PRICES in Penang’s residential market continue to rise, although the overall volume of transactions has fallen, says Raine & Horne International Zaki + Partners director Michael Geh when presenting the Penang Housing Property Monitor for 4Q2013. This was gleaned from the National Property Information Centre’s data for Penang from 1H2010 to 1H2013, he adds.

In 1H2010, transactions on the island’s primary and secondary markets totalled 8,301. Sales grew to 13,832 in 1H2011, but declined to 11,889 in 1H2012 and 8,547 in 1H2013.

“The fourth quarter of 2013 saw a continuous downward trend on the primary and secondary markets in terms of units sold,” remarks Geh. “One of the main reasons was that loans were hard to come by. This factor alone pulled the Penang developer-direct market down during the quarter. The secondary market was still active, but a little down in terms of units sold.

Geh: There was good take-up of anything less than RM500,000 as people are looking for affordability now. I would describe the market as price-sensitive.

“There was good take-up of anything less than RM500,000 as people are looking for affordability now. I would describe the market as price-sensitive.”

The 4Q2013 data shows there was double-digit year-on-year price growth in many of the areas sampled, which could spill over into 1Q2014.

“January would have seen strong activity because Penangites who work overseas or in KL come home for the Chinese New Year holidays and usually purchase properties for their family or help them upgrade,” Geh explains.

Overall, consumer confidence is strong, he comments, attributing this to the soon-to-be-opened second bridge, the RM1.25 billion worth of investments pumped into the state by the federal government and the opening of IKEA and the Penang Designer Village in Batu Kawan, among others. News that Sunway Bhd is buying acres of land on the island from Lee Rubber Co Ltd, which, once developed, will have an estimated gross development value of RM1.5 billion, has also boosted optimism in the property market.

As a result, consumers are on the hunt for good buys in the Penang housing market, says Geh, highlighting several hot developments and areas on the island and the mainland.

One is E&O Bhd’s Seri Tanjung Pinang in the northern part of the island while the 152-acre The Light Waterfront by IJM Land Bhd is another. Parts of the latter, which is very close to the first bridge, have been completed and handed over to the owners. According to Geh, The Light Waterfront properties have seen a lot of rental activity and secondary market sales in the last three to four years.

In the south, near the second bridge, Teluk Kumbar and Teluk Tempoyak are creating a buzz, he says, adding that areas south of Butterworth, such as Juru, Bukit Tambun, Batu Kawan and Sungai Bakap, are getting much attention, also thanks to their proximity to the second bridge.

A view of Penang taken from Komtar Tower

State housing policy and auctions
While the outlook is rosy, a possible roadblock is the state government’s new housing policy to curb speculation. It states that properties priced RM400,000 and below on the island and RM250,000 and below on the mainland can only be sold after the fifth year of purchase. There are also restrictions on the resale of low-cost (RM42,000) and low-medium-cost (RM72,500)homes within the first 10 years of purchase.

Then, there is the 3% levy on purchases by foreigners and 2% levy on the seller of any property within three years of the date on the sale and purchase agreement. The new policy was to have taken effect on Feb 1, but has now been postponed to March 1. However, the 3% levy, on top of the 30% Real Property Gains Tax, on foreign buyers took effect this month.

Geh feels that the new policy will impact the Penang residential market, although it is too early to say by how much exactly.

In 4Q2013, house transactions in the mature residential areas of the island were still strong. According to Geh, this was because people wanted to buy houses that were near their family homes or place of work.

Besides buying on the primary and secondary markets, Geh advises homebuyers to consider auctions. However, this can be a tedious process. “Auctioning is slow because the people who really need a house or want to buy something don’t get the relevant information easily to make a purchase,” he explains. “Information is not easily disseminated, like through a website, and people still need to look through the newspapers. It is still an adventure. When auction information is offered to purchasers efficiently, the market will get off the ground.”

Fourth-quarter performanceThe 4Q2013 Penang housing property monitor shows that the prices of houses in well-established suburbs continued to grow quarter on quarter while in other areas the prices held steady.

The prices of 1-storey terraced houses in Green Lane, for example, rose to RM650,000 for the highest q-o-q growth of 13.85% compared with such homes in the other areas sampled. Development in Green Lane began in the 1960s, transforming the small farming village into a bustling neighbourhood. One-storey terraced houses in other areas that showed price growth include those in Jelutong (+12.31%), Sungai Dua (+7.69%), Bandar Bayan Baru (+6.25%) and Sungai Ara (+4.76%).

Y-o-y, all types of houses cost more in the areas sampled except two. The prices of 1-storey terraced houses in Seberang Perai Tengah dropped 6.25% to RM160,000 while those of 2-storey terraced houses in Sungai Ara held steady at RM750,000.

Demand for houses in Seberang Perai Tengah is much less than that for houses in other areas of Seberang Perai, says Geh, adding that houses to the west of Bukit Mertajam, nearer Perak, are considered hot. The areas to the east of Bukit Mertajam are less developed, he points out, although it is just a matter of time before development reaches there and has a positive effect on prices.

As for Sungai Ara, Geh finds it to be a very stable residential area. “It is like Subang Jaya or Cheras, where property prices don’t go up or down quickly.”

Rents and yields in 4Q2013 remained relatively stable q-o-q and y-o-y. “Market values were at a record high in 4Q, so rents did not go up much on account of affordability. Thus, yields did not increase,” Geh points out. “In some places, yields came down but values went up. Rents cannot be increased in line with capital values because this could lead to tenants moving out.”

Penang’s housing market continues to be strong on the island and mainland. Will it react to the state’s new policy that takes effect on March 1? Only time will tell.


This article first appeared in The Edge Malaysia Weekly, on February 14, 2014.

Economic factors and the property market

RECENTLY there have been several articles on the high prices of properties, household income, household debt, Budget 2014 and their impact on each other.

The property market can be divided into two sectors, namely: i) property which is meant for occupation either by an owner-occupier or a tenant and ii) those meant as an investment in the short term.

Investment in or acquisition of a property that is meant for occupation is almost always safe and profitable in the long term for the buyer, seller, lender and developer due to normal population growth, migration to the urban areas, increase in new households/companies, increase in savings, increase in number of households/companies who want to upgrade, increase in salaries/business turnover, expansion of business, etc.

Chart 1 shows the relationship between household income and property prices.

There is, therefore, a direct relationship between household income and the price of a property that a purchaser can afford. There is also a direct relationship between property price and whether the income used by the bank is the net or gross income. There are also direct relationships between the amount of savings (and therefore, downpayment), average lending rate, loan tenure and price.

Similarly there is also a direct relationship between rent paid or payable and property value.

Thus, when a property is acquired for “occupation” purposes the monthly mortgage payment and/or rent payable are still under the “control” of the buyer/tenant of the property which then will determine the value of the property.

This is, however, not the case when a property is purchased purely as an investment i.e. a financial instrument or commodity to be traded over the short term (as it was in the subprime crisis) to make a quick capital profit on the difference between the purchase price and the sale price.

Here, powerful “external factors” that affect the demand, supply and prices – whether singularly or jointly – take over control of the investment. The external factors are dynamic and dictate whether the investment leads to a profit or loss at the end of the short term cycle.

External factors include the following: Real Property Gains Tax and tenure, restrictions on foreigners, foreign direct investments (FDIs), national and local GDP growth rates, average lending rates, Bursa Malaysia movements, private capital fund inflows/outflows, rebates and developers interest-bearing schemes (DIBS), freebies, block purchases by speculators, investment/wealth management clubs and parties friendly to the developers, loan policies by banks with regard to gross/net income and gross/net price, loan tenure, downpayments, interest rates, favoured/unfavoured property sector, etc.

Changes in these external factors impact on the market.

In 2007, compared to 2006, changes in the external forces were positive and market values/transactions increased by between 25% and 65%. In 2009, changes in the external forces were negative and market values and volumes decreased by 20% to 40% compared to 2008.

Between 2010 and 2013, many positive changes took place. These include: increase in private capital flows, boom in the KLSE, increase in FDIs, drop in the average lending rates to below 5%, increase in the amount of loans to the broad property sector and in particular to the high end residential market, DIBS and freebies by developers, loan to value ratios based on gross prices and active participation in the primary market by block buyers, speculators and foreigners.

As a direct consequence, prices increased by 10%-15% each year on a cumulative basis and new schemes of all types of properties were launched at the highest possible prices in every available parcel of land.

With the anti-speculation measures introduced in Budget 2014, the external factors have again changed. What then will be the consequences in 2014?

i) A reduction in primary market transactions due to drop in the effective demand and the curtailment of the arbitrary price increase for each subsequent phase.

ii) Removal or reduced speculation. Upward push on prices will cease in the primary and secondary markets.

iii) Prices of properties which cannot be rented or resold quickly will drop first. The quantum depends on one’s holding power. The comparison method will continue the downward trend started by the first property to drop its price to all other subsequent properties even if they are not being offered for sale immediately.

iv) The number of high value properties launched will reduce as the long term effective demand is more for the owner occupier and tenant market which is based on actual net income and affordable rents. Launches will be postponed.

v) Developers will start to plan and build more affordable units as their revenue will have to come from sales.

vi) Rentability, in addition to the saleability, will take greater importance. A resale cannot take place if the property is not rentable or occupied.

These consequences will happen in varying degrees until the external factors change again. New external factors can be anything from the MRT/LRT routes, completion of KLIA2, interest rates increase, the interest of Chinese and Singaporean developers and investors in Malaysian properties (due to the cooling measures in their own countries). Other factors include government incentives for developers and occupiers of buildings in Tun Razak Exchange (which will suppress the existing office market) and the introduction of GST which will push costs up.

In conclusion, if a property is planned, built, financed, sold and bought for occupation by owners or tenants to either stay or to conduct business, the fundamentals then dictate that the property investment will be secure and profitable as the occupier is in control and the market will adjust itself with just the right supply, prices, rents and profits.

However, if the property market is allowed primarily to become a short-term investment vehicle for quick profits, there will be a sharp rise in household debts, foreclosures, social unrest, misallocation of the nation’s savings and wealth, unjust distribution of hard earned income to a small group, unless the government steps in, as it has done in Budget 2014, or the external factors change again.

• P.B. Nehru is the managing director of City Valuers and Consultants Sdn Bhd. - The Star

Vital to act against errant developers Their defiant behaviour put Housing Tribunal’s effectiveness in question

LAST week, I compared the difference between a court judgement and an award by a Housing Tribunal. I brought up a case in which a house-buyer filed for liquidated damages of RM40,000 from the developer, and had it granted by the tribunal.

With the award registered at the relevant civil court, the work or function of theHousing Tribunal comes to an end. Should the developer fail to make the payment awarded by the tribunal, the house-buyer would then have to seek redress with the civil court.

However, if the developer resorts to delaying tactics and the buyer faces legal fees he can’t afford, then there’s a very real chance that he will never get any money from the developer.

“But, wait ... didn’t the Housing Tribunal president say it’s an offence not to comply with the tribunal’s order? Didn’t the president say I could lodge a complaint with the Housing Ministry? Surely, there is still hope?” the house-buyer thinks.

I think credit must be given to the Housing Tribunal for the speedy resolution of disputes and the granting of awards. However, the tribunal’s effectiveness in resolving house-buyers’ problem will continue to remain highly doubtful until developers are made to be “award-compliant”.

That is to say, all developers must be made to pay as ordered by the Housing Tribunal without the case having to be dragged to the civil court.

As we have discussed before, failure to comply with a Housing Tribunal award is an offence punishable by a fine of up to RM10,000 and/or imprisonment of up to two years. Therefore, in addition to being enforceable in the civil courts, a Housing Tribunal award, unlike a civil court judgement, may entail criminal sanction.

A housing developer and (by virtue of section 22(1) of the HDA) the directors, managers and secretaries, as well as agents, clerks or servants of the housing developer can be sent to prison if the developer does not pay as ordered by theHousing Tribunal. They can be imprisoned between a year and three years and to a fine of between RM50,000 and RM250,000.

Prosecution, however, lies in the hands of the Public Prosecutor, not the Housing Tribunal, and despite a few thousands awards not having been complied with over the years, the number of prosecution cases remains disgracefully negligible.

Enforcement

Shortly before the 2013 general election, I witnessed the presentation of letters of appointment to the presidents of the Housing Tribunal by the then honorable Housing Minister and heard him speak. In his speech, the minister acknowledged appreciatively the large number of awards made by the Housing Tribunal over the years, but also noted that thousands of awards remained engkar (not complied with).

He said more effective ways of ensuring compliance had to be looked into.

The question now, is prosecution not an effective means of ensuring compliance by defiant developers? Parliament must have thought so when it saw it fit in 2002 to allow for criminal sanction to be imposed on developers who defy the awards by the Housing Tribunal. After all, surely most, if not all, developers would rather pay up than be slapped with a hefty fine, or worse still, risk going to prison?

On top of that, a developer, once convicted, is liable to a fine of RM1,000 for each and every day that he fails to do the bidding of the Housing Tribunal (section 16AD(2) of the HDA). If that is not enough to make a non-compliant developer pay up immediately, I don’t know what would be.

It comes as no surprise that developers who have been prosecuted have been known to pay up immediately.

Unfortunately, developers have also been known to get away with rather insignificant fines. And sadly, cases of developers being hauled up and prosecuted remain far and few in between, despite the increasing number of offences being committed.

What’s noteworthy here is that developers do pay up when faced with prosecution. We can, therefore, conclude that effective prosecution is the only sure means to ensure compliance by stubborn developers. In fact, I dare say that severe sentences, such as imprisonment, in a few or even just a couple of prosecution cases, would serve as a very effective deterrence.

It is my hope, and I am sure the hope of many house-buyers out there, that the current honorable Housing Minister Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahalan, will during his term in office, ensure that there is a significant increase in prosecution regardingengkar awards.

Until this takes place, the effectiveness of the Housing Tribunal as a forum for house-buyers to fight against errant developers, and the efficacy of the Housing Ministry in protecting the rights of house-buyers, will remain doubtful.

Action against errant developers is seen by many as something to be desired.

Chang Kim Loong is the honorary secretary-general of the National House Buyers Association (HBA): www.hba.org.my, a non-profit, non-governmental organisation manned purely by volunteers. He is also an NGO councillor at the Subang Jaya Municipal Council. - The Star

Latest government cooling measures can help stabilise property market

THERE are many ways to stabilise the residential property market and the latest measure by the Government to curb bulk buying is a step in the right direction to ensure a more equitable market that is led by real demand.

On Monday, Urban Wellbeing, Hou­sing and Local Government Minister Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan said developers selling more than four residential units to a single buyer or group must now obtain prior approval from the Controller of Housing. The new enforcement would be made compulsory in all real-estate advertising and sale permit materials.

Property consultants gave their thumbs up to the move aimed at reigning in property speculation and flipping activities for fast gains.

Property consultancy Khong & Jaafar managing director Elvin Fernandez says the curb will in the medium to long term help to stabilise the housing market. “It is very good that these measures have come out. Bulk buying has been misused and the current intended curtailment to limit such buying to four units is good. Bulk buying by speculators with the intent of flipping and crowding out genuine buyers is not healthy,” Fernandez says.

He says bulk buying can distort the market when speculative groups of buyers signal to developers demand which in fact is not real demand in the market. However, Fernandez believes bulk buying is a good thing if it is done for genuine reasons such as parents buying houses for each of their children when there are favourable interest rates.

Property clubs

“Bulk buying by a group of property buyers under property clubs can be disruptive only when they feed on rising prices. If such clubs are more investment orientated and are highly transparent about their operations, I see no harm in them,” Fernandez observes.

Fernandez: ‘Bulk buying has been misused.’

VPC Alliance Malaysia Sdn Bhd managing director James Wong discloses that bulk buying are mostly done via property investors club and by foreign buyers from China, Singapore, Japan and South Korea.

“They are mostly financially strong and are interested to buy in strategic locations with public amenities such as projects nearby to MRT stations and LRT extension lines, which usually have higher opportunities for capital appreciation. Bulk property buyers normally have the financial muscle to buy in bulk to get good pricing and discounts, and they usually go for properties of RM500,000 or more.”

Wong contends that bulk buyers of properties are indirectly providing shadow banking financing for projects and assisting developers to fast-track the required sales target for bridging loan drawdown.

As such, bulk purchase of properties tend to distort the market as they are sometimes “intermediary” buyers and after buying, wait for opportunity to flip and dispose the properties.

Concurring, CB Richard Ellis Malaysia executive director Paul Khong says bulk buying creates artificial demand in the early stages of a project’s launch.

It usually involves high-rise residential strata properties where supply is high, but rarely for properties with genuinely strong demand especially landed segment in prime locations.

According to Khong, bulk buying has been successful in hot areas and allow developers to report 100% sales on the first day of a project’s launch.

“Due to the artificial demand of a big take up at attractive prices in the early stages, the stock available to the market quickly dries up and it creates a rush and a buzz for the balance units which sends the unit prices rocketing further. This also sets the tone for prices in the next launch,” Khong explains.

Cooling the market

Due to the high number of units booked, developers would be willing to offer more discounts to push sales and pare down their risks.

The property clubs are used to bring in quick sales by offering good discounts prior to the actual launch. Developers can get their sales numbers high from the start and prices will rise even higher.

Khong says the curb on property bulk buying to reduce unhealthy and excessive speculation in the market needs to be closely monitored and has to be enforced effectively to ensure a fine balance prevails in the market.

Khong: ‘Property investments will always be a favorite

While excessive speculation and false demand will create problems affecting the capital values of properties, he says too much legislative intervention in the property market will affect its “free market” status.

Besides bulk buying, there are other contributory causes for the spike in property prices: developer interest bearing schemes; attractive funding/financing rates; low fixed-deposit rates and the weak foreign exchange that attracted more foreign buyers to the local market in recent years.

“On the whole, the curb gives a fairer chance to more genuine Malaysians to own properties at reasonable prices or even at the developer’s original list prices.

“The public will continue to invest and make profits from property purchases. With inflation all around, property investments will do well as it is a hedge against inflation and will always be a favourite investment choice for all,” Khong concludes.

Fernandez foresees more measures and tweaking of the measures to be introduced moving forward.

He singled out the DIBS and not property bulk buying as one of the main factors that has caused the sharp price hikes in the local housing market in the last few years.

“The sharp price hike in selected areas of Kuala Lumpur, Penang, Johor Baru and Kota Kinabalu has more to do with the DIBS. Largely, as a result of the DIBS in 2009, transactions in the primary market climbed from about 25,000 housing units a year or about 12% of the residential market in 2009, to about 60,000 units in 2012, or 22% of the residential market nationwide last year,” he says.

He says after the DIBS was banned under the Budget 2014 announcement, short-term property investors or “flippers” are finding it hard to operate in the current market, which is an objective of the Government’s cooling measures.

When the flippers have been subdued, it will give more room to first-time house buyers, upgraders and investors to participate in the market; the phenomena has been observed in other markets including Hong Kong.

“Bulk buying came on more recently in the last year or so when buyers with purely speculative intent came forward to take advantage of the rising market. Until the end of 2012, house prices have been rising in line with household income, increasing at 5% per annum. It is only selected hotspots that prices have spiked to more than 10 times the annual average household income,” he says.

As to the practice of pre-launch sales and its impact on other genuine buyers, Fernandez observes: “Pre-launch sales are acceptable market practices for developers because it enables them to gauge demand and is, in fact, a risk mitigation measure. It is only when it is used incorrectly that it becomes questionable such as when genuine first-time buyers, upgraders and investors are excluded. Many pre-launch sales have, for example, been open to only the developers staff, or friends.”

He says pre-launch sales should be allowed but some controls must be put in place to ensure all Malaysians who want to buy on the first day are given a chance. - The Star

Olive Tree Residences

A Project by Harta Intan

Bayan Baru, Penang

Property Details

Type: Condo

Tenure: Freehold

Expected Date of Completion: December 2014

The Star