How property prices are artifically inflated
The common economic logic says, ‘other things remaining the same if the sales are not happening and inventories are piling up, the prices should fall’. Other things such as income, tastes and preferences don’t usually change in the short run. Thus, slowing demand should lead to a fall in the prices. However, that’s not happening in India’s realty market.
Why?
The simple reason is both the demand for and the supply of real estate especially residential real estate is being manipulated by vested interests.
Manipulation of supply
Given the estimated shortage of 20-25 million residential units in the country and rapidly growing economy, there will always be a growing demand for accommodation. If supply doesn’t match, it will lead to a rapid increase in the home prices. In India, that has been happening for quite some time.
That in turn, has made property prices unaffordable to even the upper middle-class households as reflected by high 'home price/income' ratios. That explains buyers’ disinterest and overall lower demand for properties at current prices. That should ideally lead to a fall in India's housing prices but that’s not happening or happening at a slower rate than it should.
Why?
Because vested interests ensure that the supply of homes lags behind demand for homes i.e. supply of homes increases at a slower rate than its demand so that even at lower demand, the home prices need not fall much. In other words, India's realty market is rigged.
Otherwise, 2% annual rental when the average cost of borrowing is 9% can’t be justified especially in a sluggish market where capital appreciation can’t compensate for negative net rental i.e. -7% {rental (2%) – cost of borrowing (9%)}.
How can the supply of homes be limited by regulatory authorities, the approval and permit givers?
Government regulators including municipal authorities can influence the change in supply of homes by imposing artificial limits on the cost and availability of land –by changing or not changing or manipulating rules regulating the FSI (fl0or surface index), construction in coastal zones, age for redevelopment of old buildings, competitive bidding for limited quantity of land and allowing or not allowing payment in instalments.
FSI (Floor Surface Index) - Either by reducing it or by not letting it increase even if that’s needed or using discretion to deny an increase in the FSI to those who seek it and are ready to pay for it, the regulators can easily restrict the supply of homes in an area. Just have a look at permitted FSIs in top cities where land is highly expensive:
New York: 17
Tokyo: 20
Mumbai: 1.33
Manipulating payment options for land bidders – allowing payments in the instalments (10% now, rest in instalments) rather than full payment at one go increases the number of bidders and pushes up the prices of limited quantity of land, the key raw material for construction of residential buildings that often accounts for as high as 60% of the apartment cost in places like Mumbai.
Simply slowing the process of giving regulatory approvals to new housing projects can slow the rate at which the supply of new homes increases. That will make the supply curve relatively inelastic forcing buyers to pay more for a typical apartment/home.
Manipulating eligibility criteria for the redevelopment of old buildings - for instance, keeping 40 years instead of 25 years, the minimum age of old buildings for redevelopment – quite relevant for big cities like Mumbai where land is scarce and limited.
How can builders/realty companies constrain the effective supply of apartments on their own without any help from the municipal authorities and regulators?
If supply can be constrained even in a short period of time, you have an inelastic supply curve that will artificially raise the home prices depending on demand and bargaining power of the unorganised home buyers. This is how it is done:
Imposition of lock-in-period for transfer of (usually under-construction) properties to stop original buyers from reselling their properties at slightly lower prices than what the builder is charging – that reduces the effective supply of homes at any given point of time even if there’s no change in the absolute supply of homes. Resale prices are more transparent and market determined, and are usually lower as there's level playing between the buyers and sellers.
Imposition of hefty transfer charges i.e. 100 rupees to 1000 rupees per square feet depending on prevailing resale market price if an original buyer wants to sell his/her property before the builder has cleared all his unsold inventories. That is aimed at neutralising any potential capital gains that the buyers may make - to discourage him/her from reselling. This is an indirect way to impose lock-in period on the unorganised buyers.
Joining hands with regulatory authorities for slower approvals: using his right contacts, a realty company, the owner of an ‘already in progress project’ may influence the approval to other nearby likely projects that may come up or are coming up to keep the supply of homes in an area constrained and limited at any given point of time so that it can sell its own homes at higher prices than it could otherwise.
Another tactic could be to use political contacts to delay an important infrastructure project (e.g. trans-harbour link) that is expected to connect suburbs/nearby areas (e.g. Navi Mumbai) to central districts (e.g. Sewari/Parel)… if trans-harbour is ready many home buyers will not be willing to pay the kind of premium they are paying at the moment for the properties in Sewari/Parel/Worli today. That would mean huge losses for realty companies who have bought mill lands in Central Mumbai region to develop them into realty projects.
Delaying completion of ongoing projects – what about the penalty for late possession? One-sided apartment buyers’ contracts mean builders can extract as much as 18% a year if home buyers delay the payment. Interestingly, in the case of any delay in giving possession, builders themselves don’t pay more than ₹5-10 per square per feet per month. Thus, ₹10 per sq. ft. per month for a 1,000 sq. ft. apartment means late delivery payment of 10*10,00*12=Rs. 1.20 lakh/annum irrespective of the apartment price.
· Really smart realty companies do even better: they don’t have such penalty provisions in their apartment buyers contracts, or deny late delivery payment on flimsy grounds (The 3C company a builder in Noida is a master in this game) like you didn't sent me notice for penalty, or cap their liability to 100,000 rupees i.e. 0.5% of the apartment price (₹ 50 lakh). Worse, many don't have possession dates in their apartment buyers contract even a city like Mumbai.
· Realty companies manipulate payment schedules in such a way that long before the actual delivery of the apartment, they have already collected over 90-95% of the full cost of the apartments. Assuming, an apartment is priced at ₹5000/sq. ft. 90% means ₹45 lakh or 4.5 million. Even if one invests ₹45 lakh at 10 per cent per annum (say in corporate bonds), it would mean an interest income of ₹5 lakh/annum.
· Thus, for every year of delay, the builder is making ₹3.3 lakh (4.5 -1.2). Thus, a three-year delay (quite common, especially in Noida/NCR region) in giving possession means a net gain of Rs. 10 lakhs to the builder (4.5 - 1.2 multiplied by 3), and 30-35% extra cost to the home buyer that may turn a good buy into a bad one. So, the naïve home buyers (instead of punishing them) are actually subsidising the realty companies for delaying the completion of projects. So, why would the builders hurry the completion of realty projects especially in a sluggish market when there are not many new buyers to extract? Meanwhile, the homebuyers also pay rental for self-accommodation and lose tax deduction that further add to their cost of buying apartments.
Manipulation of demand
You would want to ask: Okay the supply can be manipulated by builders and realty companies but how can the demand be managed or manipulated by them. This is how home buyers allow themselves to be manipulated.
There’s often a conflict between marketing and basic laws of economics that essentially implies value for money. Marketing wins (even if temporarily) over economic laws by adopting the following tactics:
i) Helped by a network of sweet talking but unscrupulous estate brokers, misleading advertisements constantly reminds you to have your dream home or why you must invest in a property…and many of us eventually fall for our dream-home traps.
ii) Celebrity endorsements – MS Dhoni is endorsing this housing project (Amprapali for instance in Noida) - hence it’s a must buy
iii) Beautifully decorated sample flat in most big housing projects that entice you to have your own dream home even by going for a big loan that may be painful to service.
iv) A nicely printed brochure so that a gutter around the yet to be developed housing project will look like a river with clean blue water, and make you immediately fall in love with it... making you go for it.
v) In a sluggish market, realty companies are even paying referral fees for luring friends and relatives to buy artificially high-priced apartment homes in over-supplied locations that you've already bought in.
vi) Banks and housing finance companies in collaboration with realty sector use the following sure-shot tools to lure home buyers: compact homes (which are nothing but smaller sized apartments hence priced lower) that you can easily afford, and interest rate subvention (pay 20% now and balance 80% on possession); if everything fails, brokers use their killer argument that never fails: paying rent is like throwing money in the gutter, while paying the EMIs create an asset…and we can make your EMI exactly equal to the rent you’re paying... so what's the worry. EMIs can be brought down simply by increasing the tenure of loans...banks don't need to reduce the interest rates. Yet many of us fall for it.
Self-inflicted damage
I want to buy only in this area/society/project (because my friend stays here and Sachin Tendukar or Deepika Padukone live here) – this sounds funny but it restricts your choices – your buying options and you end up paying more than you should.
Remember, arranged marriages do have some positives such as availability of more than one option to choose from. Thus, by falling in love with your ‘yet to be purchased’ dream home, you’re restricting your choices and hurting your bargaining power that’s going to cost you real money, and may tie you to a bad buy for life.
This is how most of us pay more than we should for our dream homes. So if you’re looking for a bargain deal, please try to be as flexible as you can about what/where/when/which project to go for…
To summarise, the property prices are not falling or falling at a much slower rate that defies economic logic i.e. demand slowdown should lead to a fall in prices simply because it's systematically rigged and we allow ourselves to be manipulated. Poor regulation adds to the problem. If market forces are allowed a free hand, India's home prices will correct sharply and become affordable but the vested interests are not letting it happen.
This is written by Ritesh Singh and shared with all as I found it logical. more
Why?
The simple reason is both the demand for and the supply of real estate especially residential real estate is being manipulated by vested interests.
Manipulation of supply
Given the estimated shortage of 20-25 million residential units in the country and rapidly growing economy, there will always be a growing demand for accommodation. If supply doesn’t match, it will lead to a rapid increase in the home prices. In India, that has been happening for quite some time.
That in turn, has made property prices unaffordable to even the upper middle-class households as reflected by high 'home price/income' ratios. That explains buyers’ disinterest and overall lower demand for properties at current prices. That should ideally lead to a fall in India's housing prices but that’s not happening or happening at a slower rate than it should.
Why?
Because vested interests ensure that the supply of homes lags behind demand for homes i.e. supply of homes increases at a slower rate than its demand so that even at lower demand, the home prices need not fall much. In other words, India's realty market is rigged.
Otherwise, 2% annual rental when the average cost of borrowing is 9% can’t be justified especially in a sluggish market where capital appreciation can’t compensate for negative net rental i.e. -7% {rental (2%) – cost of borrowing (9%)}.
How can the supply of homes be limited by regulatory authorities, the approval and permit givers?
Government regulators including municipal authorities can influence the change in supply of homes by imposing artificial limits on the cost and availability of land –by changing or not changing or manipulating rules regulating the FSI (fl0or surface index), construction in coastal zones, age for redevelopment of old buildings, competitive bidding for limited quantity of land and allowing or not allowing payment in instalments.
FSI (Floor Surface Index) - Either by reducing it or by not letting it increase even if that’s needed or using discretion to deny an increase in the FSI to those who seek it and are ready to pay for it, the regulators can easily restrict the supply of homes in an area. Just have a look at permitted FSIs in top cities where land is highly expensive:
New York: 17
Tokyo: 20
Mumbai: 1.33
Manipulating payment options for land bidders – allowing payments in the instalments (10% now, rest in instalments) rather than full payment at one go increases the number of bidders and pushes up the prices of limited quantity of land, the key raw material for construction of residential buildings that often accounts for as high as 60% of the apartment cost in places like Mumbai.
Simply slowing the process of giving regulatory approvals to new housing projects can slow the rate at which the supply of new homes increases. That will make the supply curve relatively inelastic forcing buyers to pay more for a typical apartment/home.
Manipulating eligibility criteria for the redevelopment of old buildings - for instance, keeping 40 years instead of 25 years, the minimum age of old buildings for redevelopment – quite relevant for big cities like Mumbai where land is scarce and limited.
How can builders/realty companies constrain the effective supply of apartments on their own without any help from the municipal authorities and regulators?
If supply can be constrained even in a short period of time, you have an inelastic supply curve that will artificially raise the home prices depending on demand and bargaining power of the unorganised home buyers. This is how it is done:
Imposition of lock-in-period for transfer of (usually under-construction) properties to stop original buyers from reselling their properties at slightly lower prices than what the builder is charging – that reduces the effective supply of homes at any given point of time even if there’s no change in the absolute supply of homes. Resale prices are more transparent and market determined, and are usually lower as there's level playing between the buyers and sellers.
Imposition of hefty transfer charges i.e. 100 rupees to 1000 rupees per square feet depending on prevailing resale market price if an original buyer wants to sell his/her property before the builder has cleared all his unsold inventories. That is aimed at neutralising any potential capital gains that the buyers may make - to discourage him/her from reselling. This is an indirect way to impose lock-in period on the unorganised buyers.
Joining hands with regulatory authorities for slower approvals: using his right contacts, a realty company, the owner of an ‘already in progress project’ may influence the approval to other nearby likely projects that may come up or are coming up to keep the supply of homes in an area constrained and limited at any given point of time so that it can sell its own homes at higher prices than it could otherwise.
Another tactic could be to use political contacts to delay an important infrastructure project (e.g. trans-harbour link) that is expected to connect suburbs/nearby areas (e.g. Navi Mumbai) to central districts (e.g. Sewari/Parel)… if trans-harbour is ready many home buyers will not be willing to pay the kind of premium they are paying at the moment for the properties in Sewari/Parel/Worli today. That would mean huge losses for realty companies who have bought mill lands in Central Mumbai region to develop them into realty projects.
Delaying completion of ongoing projects – what about the penalty for late possession? One-sided apartment buyers’ contracts mean builders can extract as much as 18% a year if home buyers delay the payment. Interestingly, in the case of any delay in giving possession, builders themselves don’t pay more than ₹5-10 per square per feet per month. Thus, ₹10 per sq. ft. per month for a 1,000 sq. ft. apartment means late delivery payment of 10*10,00*12=Rs. 1.20 lakh/annum irrespective of the apartment price.
· Really smart realty companies do even better: they don’t have such penalty provisions in their apartment buyers contracts, or deny late delivery payment on flimsy grounds (The 3C company a builder in Noida is a master in this game) like you didn't sent me notice for penalty, or cap their liability to 100,000 rupees i.e. 0.5% of the apartment price (₹ 50 lakh). Worse, many don't have possession dates in their apartment buyers contract even a city like Mumbai.
· Realty companies manipulate payment schedules in such a way that long before the actual delivery of the apartment, they have already collected over 90-95% of the full cost of the apartments. Assuming, an apartment is priced at ₹5000/sq. ft. 90% means ₹45 lakh or 4.5 million. Even if one invests ₹45 lakh at 10 per cent per annum (say in corporate bonds), it would mean an interest income of ₹5 lakh/annum.
· Thus, for every year of delay, the builder is making ₹3.3 lakh (4.5 -1.2). Thus, a three-year delay (quite common, especially in Noida/NCR region) in giving possession means a net gain of Rs. 10 lakhs to the builder (4.5 - 1.2 multiplied by 3), and 30-35% extra cost to the home buyer that may turn a good buy into a bad one. So, the naïve home buyers (instead of punishing them) are actually subsidising the realty companies for delaying the completion of projects. So, why would the builders hurry the completion of realty projects especially in a sluggish market when there are not many new buyers to extract? Meanwhile, the homebuyers also pay rental for self-accommodation and lose tax deduction that further add to their cost of buying apartments.
Manipulation of demand
You would want to ask: Okay the supply can be manipulated by builders and realty companies but how can the demand be managed or manipulated by them. This is how home buyers allow themselves to be manipulated.
There’s often a conflict between marketing and basic laws of economics that essentially implies value for money. Marketing wins (even if temporarily) over economic laws by adopting the following tactics:
i) Helped by a network of sweet talking but unscrupulous estate brokers, misleading advertisements constantly reminds you to have your dream home or why you must invest in a property…and many of us eventually fall for our dream-home traps.
ii) Celebrity endorsements – MS Dhoni is endorsing this housing project (Amprapali for instance in Noida) - hence it’s a must buy
iii) Beautifully decorated sample flat in most big housing projects that entice you to have your own dream home even by going for a big loan that may be painful to service.
iv) A nicely printed brochure so that a gutter around the yet to be developed housing project will look like a river with clean blue water, and make you immediately fall in love with it... making you go for it.
v) In a sluggish market, realty companies are even paying referral fees for luring friends and relatives to buy artificially high-priced apartment homes in over-supplied locations that you've already bought in.
vi) Banks and housing finance companies in collaboration with realty sector use the following sure-shot tools to lure home buyers: compact homes (which are nothing but smaller sized apartments hence priced lower) that you can easily afford, and interest rate subvention (pay 20% now and balance 80% on possession); if everything fails, brokers use their killer argument that never fails: paying rent is like throwing money in the gutter, while paying the EMIs create an asset…and we can make your EMI exactly equal to the rent you’re paying... so what's the worry. EMIs can be brought down simply by increasing the tenure of loans...banks don't need to reduce the interest rates. Yet many of us fall for it.
Self-inflicted damage
I want to buy only in this area/society/project (because my friend stays here and Sachin Tendukar or Deepika Padukone live here) – this sounds funny but it restricts your choices – your buying options and you end up paying more than you should.
Remember, arranged marriages do have some positives such as availability of more than one option to choose from. Thus, by falling in love with your ‘yet to be purchased’ dream home, you’re restricting your choices and hurting your bargaining power that’s going to cost you real money, and may tie you to a bad buy for life.
This is how most of us pay more than we should for our dream homes. So if you’re looking for a bargain deal, please try to be as flexible as you can about what/where/when/which project to go for…
To summarise, the property prices are not falling or falling at a much slower rate that defies economic logic i.e. demand slowdown should lead to a fall in prices simply because it's systematically rigged and we allow ourselves to be manipulated. Poor regulation adds to the problem. If market forces are allowed a free hand, India's home prices will correct sharply and become affordable but the vested interests are not letting it happen.
This is written by Ritesh Singh and shared with all as I found it logical. more
Viewed by 2420
View all 32 comments Below 32 comments
The Login does not hold good at times. However, there should be laid down law, which should be implemented. more
May 06
The agents, financiers use to get the properties booked in connivance with builder and after paying 2 instalments they use to sell on profit to make actual home buyers fool. Now the prices have been slashed due to govt.policies they are in trouble and even not completing the construction. more
Apr 05
Sudesh Rai ji has presented a wonderful analysis. I wish if our governments could understand the basic of real estate in domestic application and take an appropriate action instead of saving Banks under bad debt to Real Estate business. In case government continues to support Real Estate Builders and the Banks in an undue manner the economic situation in the country is likely to worsen making common citizens to lose for ever who depend on Banks. more
Apr 04
