Archives for category: Singapore

This is from November but still interesting.

Personal wealth per adult grew strongly in Singapore up to 2012. Since then it has risen slowly in domestic currency units, and declined a little in terms of US dollars. Despite this drop, average wealth remains at a high level – USD 268,780 per adult
in mid-2017, compared to USD 115,560 in 2000. The rise was mostly caused by high savings, asset price increases, and a favorable rising exchange rate from 2005 to 2012. Singapore is now ninth in the world in terms of household wealth per adult, giving it the highest rank in Asia.
– Credit Suisse Global Wealth Report 2017 (source)

The report puts our mean and median wealth per adult at 268,776 USD and 108,850 USD respectively. This isn’t hard to imagine for most people whose HDB flat has more or less been paid up for* which probably puts most middle to senior Singaporean residents in this category. Also, the study looked at wealth per adult which excludes children who are unlikely to have any substantial assets to their name. In other words, the wealth of a family with children is not diluted to the presence of children.

What got me searching for the wealth of an average Singaporean is because I was updating my own spreadsheets the other day and I was quite surprised at the total staring back at me on my spreadsheet.

Also, I had a hunch that I might be considered pretty well-off by other people’s standards. The problem for me was: What is “other people’s standards”? So now, I finally have some idea.

What’s interesting is that the CS report takes its data from the Department of Statistics Singapore (SingStat) so let’s dive a little deeper into what SingStat counts as assets and liabilities in calculating net worth.

Thankfully, that can be summed up in one picture.

 

 

Singapore Household Balance Sheet

Singapore Household Balance Sheet (source)

So looking at this, I’m actually quite surprised that the average Singaporean adult only has 268,776 USD (362, 815 SGD) in net worth if his primary residence and CPF is included in the calculation. Here’s why.

A typical four-room flat should be worth around 400,000 SGD. Assuming that it’s jointly owned by a couple, that would be about 200,000 SGD per adult. Are the mortgage and other loans so huge that their Cash, CPF monies and life insurance** add only 163,000 SGD per adult to their net worth? Furthermore, the average has been skewed upwards by outliers as the median isn’t even half the average.

 

So, am I missing something here? Or is the average Singaporean’s net worth really the sum of his/her HDB flat and CPF and they save next to nothing plus carry a mortgage and some personal debt (e.g. credit card, car loan)?

Let me know what you think in the comments.

 

 

 

Notes:

* You can quibble about whether it’s appropriate to include your primary residence as part of your net worth but that’s how it was done in their study.

** I’m not even going to bothering adding equities as the average Singaporean probably doesn’t have much invested in the markets. Most people I know treat the market as a quick punt. There are very few people my age or even slightly older who have anything more than 50,000 SGD in the markets. For every one of me, there’s probably 7-8 more who have at most a five-digit portfolio.

Advertisements

In case you haven’t been following the news, the property market in Singapore has come back to life (kind of) with quite a number of en-bloc deals. MAS (Singapore’s central bank) also had to come out and caution that there was a little ‘exuberance’ in the market. MAS also noted that prices have transaction volumes have picked up while interest rates have remained low.

The commonly used reference rate for housing loans stood at 1.1 per cent in mid- November, compared to a peak of 3.6 per cent recorded in 2006.

However, vacancies in the rental market have remained high. According to the article, MAS noted that there are some 30,000 vacant rental properties in the market. Redevelopment of the land sold through en-bloc deals, together with existing private property developments, could add another 20,000 units to the market (of course, not all would at to the rental market).

What bothers me is that interest rates seem historically low and we seem to be at the start of a rate hike cycle.* Almost every property buyer in Singapore buys their property with a long-tenured loan (think 25 to 30 years) and if you’ve just begun to start servicing the loan, you have to be prepared for the fact that interest rates may be on their way up and drive the lifetime interest rate on your property loan to a level more like 3-5% over the lifetime of the loan.

I’m not an expert in real estate but I’ve heard stories and I have three stories that point towards what’s going on in the property market. Namely, those problems are (1) property owners not expecting a drastic rate hike, (2) vacancy rates are high but understandably so because buyers paid a high price and therefore demand steep rents, and (3) prices are (still) high despite the recent rosy outlook.

Anecdotal Evidence #1: Not many people are expecting rates to go up drastically

I’m not sure how many people are prepared for that. Anecdotally, I’ve had a friend question if rates could even get that high and I was about to slap my forehead because this friend works in a bank. How could he not know what interest rates have historically been like? The interest rate on loans have typically been much higher than they are now and we’re at the zero-bound so unless you believe the world is about to go the way of Japan, you need to prepare for the fact that interest rates will most probably go up.**

Anecdotal Evidence #2: Plenty of vacancies in projects that didn’t make sense

On the other hand, there are some property buyers who seem stuck with a horrible investment. I heard from my boss (he’s an avid follower of the property market) over lunch that some investors in a certain property have problems finding tenants. The property sits atop an MRT station (one of the last stops though so it’s at least 30mins by train to town) and is one of those shoebox apartments (1 bedroom apartment) where the price paid per square foot is ultra high (~S$1700 psf) but the actual cost of the apartment is “low” (~ S$600,000 -700,000).

A glance at listings online shows that owners are asking for close to S$2,000 per month to rent a one-bedder. And I see plenty of listings for the project which means that unless someone’s listed his unit many times over or the same unit had to be listed again week after week, there are many apartments there begging for tenants.*** Whoever has a unit there better be happy letting it stay vacant or I can’t see why someone would choose to pay almost S$2,000 per month to stay in what is effectively a hotel room when you could rent a room in an HDB flat (of course you have to share with some flatmates) in a better location for one-third the price. You have to remember that someone who can afford to pay S$2,000 per month in rent must be making at least S$8,000 per month. Most Singaporeans don’t make that much (median salary is more like S$4,700) which leaves you with foreigners. Foreigners making that much have to be at least on some sort of expat package which means that they come with families and won’t be looking at one-bedders, what more in such a far-flung location.

If there is one property like this, there are more. And my guess is that owners aren’t too bothered by the lack of tenants as long as they have the ability to service the loan. Their ability to service the loan is currently helped by historically low interest rates.

Anecdotal Evidence #3: Property prices are still high (sorta)

The third story comes from a friend of mine. Recently, he bought an Executive Condominium (EC)**** located just across the street from my flat. What this means is that our location is basically the same as far as valuation is concerned. However, the price he paid is almost 3x what I paid for my flat for an apartment of a size about 90% of my flat.

When both our apartments hit the resale market (say in 10 years) which is subject to the forces of demand and supply, I’m not sure if he will see any further upside to the price he paid for his unit. Why? Imagine a potential buyer for his unit surveying the area. The buyer will easily find that 5-room flats (~ 1200 square feet) in the same neighbourhood can be bought for around S$500,000 (assuming prices of HDB flats in this area remain as they are now). If my friend is looking to sell his place for S$1 million, the buyer will have to seriously wonder if it’s worth paying double the price of a 5-room flat in a similar location for a slightly smaller unit that comes with amenities such as a swimming pool and security post.

The only other way to justify the selling price of the S$1 million EC is to assume that the prices of HDB flats in this area will jump so much that the premium for an EC shrinks to maybe 20-30%. Based on that analysis, the upside for buyers of EC at that price is quite limited while the buyers of BTO flats like mine are much more optimistic. On the other hand, the downside is quite limited for flat owners as opposed to EC buyers.

I know my friend didn’t buy the property as an investment (i.e. to make money) but it still points towards the fact that property prices in Singapore remain elevated and we haven’t seen a fall in demand like the likes of post-’97 or ’08-’09. As with any asset class, the usual adage is well-bought is well-sold.

 

Notes:

*I’m not an inflationista. Rather, the fed has already begun the hike so it’s not like I’m being a Cassandra.

**I read that someone at the fed did a study showing how Amazon is a factor keeping prices low and I guess if this remains so, then interest rates may not need to be hiked.

***The truth is probably someone in between. Some agent listed the property many times and had to list it multiple times over the weeks. But still not a good sign, no?

****ECs are this weird scheme where the governments allow private developers to bid for land in their landbank to build a condominium development that is sold more along the lines of public housing. After 10 years, the development becomes private and is not subject to the rules that govern public housing. In essence, Singaporeans and PRs get to buy a condo for a discounted price.

Sorry for the clickbait-y title but what I’m about to say is actually quite true for almost anyone in Singapore with a half-decent job and of at least lower-middle to a middle-class family background.

And to show you that’s entirely possible, I present exhibit A- (although most Singaporeans in the financial blogging community probably already know) Mr. 15-hour-work-week (15HWW).

Mr 15HWW recently wrote a post, summarising his 7 years (so far) in investing and it shows you exactly how (link here) most middle-class people around the world actually accumulate a decent amount of money.

If you read his post, you’ll realise that for two people in their mid-30s (counting both Mr and Mrs 15HWW they pooled their resources together), they have accumulated a six-figure portfolio that is probably the envy of even some Singaporeans who should be retired or are near-retirement. The sum doesn’t include their CPF or their home*.

For many younger people about to enter, or just in, the workforce, a six-figure sum is something that seems out of reach but many people have been there and done that. More importantly, Mr 15HWW’s post reveals that it doesn’t take a genius to do it.

His returns in the market were only about 6% p.a., something that you could easily replicate if you blindly invested in an index-tracking ETF such as the STI ETF or the SPDR’s S&P 500 ETF.

The bulk of the increase in their wealth came from an amazingly high rate of savings. I really take my hat off to Mr and Mrs 15HWW because my own savings rate is nowhere near theirs. If it was, my portfolio would probably be 25% larger than it is now.

Most people think investing is complicated or they try to aim for the stars but very often, a simple investing plan of (a) saving a lot of money, (b) investing it and (c) letting it compound will lead to wealth that most people can only dream of.

So why do most people fail to get there?

Well, that’s another story for another time.

Notes:

*You will be surprised at how many people are counting on their CPF to retire and how the government is encouraging a reverse mortgage on your HDB flat**.

**Ok, technically it’s a lease buyback scheme which means the HDB pays you to stay in the flat that you’ve already fulled paid up for. And I can see the merit in the argument that you might as well monetise an asset that you can’t take with you to the grave. Also, since HDB flats are on 99-year leases, handing it down to beneficiaries when you pass away means that the asset may not be worth much when it’s passed on.

 

So, a day after I wrote a report about SPH’s business, the company releases its results for FY2017.

As expected, results are better than last year, all thanks to the divestment of the online classified business which netted them a gain of about $150 million. No one really cared much about that though because, as highlighted by SPH in their press release, their operating revenue was down about $108 million, or 13%, from a year ago.

The difficult thing for SPH now is the fallout from their retrenchment exercise. It’s bad press (pun totally intended!), especially for the new CEO that hasn’t come in with that great a reputation.

While SPH hasn’t slashed the dividend by much, their payout ratio looks terrible. Of course, that little ^ mark matters. Their payout ratio is calculated based on recurring earnings. What does that mean? Only earnings from media and property (and now possibly the education and healthcare) part of the business are counted? If so, that leaves quite a bit of earnings from the investment side and this payout ratio can be considered pretty conservative. After all, with an investment fund of $1.1 billion*, you can get more than pocket change (relative to SPH’s core businesses) in interest and returns. Anyhow, I don’t have enough information to make a conclusion.

 

sph_payoutratio2017

Are SPH’s dividends sustainable?

In short, I don’t think SPH’s results are anything out of the ordinary. Mr. Market apparently thinks the same way which is why there has been hardly any reaction to the release of the results. That’s it from me. This will probably be the last post in a long while on SPH unless something interesting develops.

*See their latest (FY2017) presentation slides, page 13.

 

Full disclosure: I own SPH stock.

Disclaimer: The report is meant to present a factual representation of the company’s business and is not a projection of how the stock will do. It is not meant to be an inducement to buy or sell the stock. As far as possible, I have tried to ensure that there are no errors. Any errors are my own. Please seek advice from an investment professional should you choose to use this information as part of your decision-making process on whether to invest in the stock or not.

 

So, I came across a report on SPH* that did a horrible valuation analysis on SPH. The main problem with the report is that they valued SPH on the basis that it was not a going concern, calculating it’s NAV and then taking a discount from there.

The report (more like blog post actually) also made simple factual errors like including Seletar Mall in SPH REIT…

So, I did my own analysis of SPH. You can download it for FREE. Leave me your comments and let me know how I can do better. (SPH (T39) report 10 Oct 17)

For those that don’t want to read through the entire thing, I’m listing some of the main points below.

Negatives:

  • The traditional media business is declining fast.
  • SPH is taking on more debt in order to fund other lines of business.
  • Other lines of business are not a sure bet.
  • New CEO not from industry nor has a good track record.

Positives:

  • Market’s current pricing of SPH seems to expect the worst.
  • Media arm’s decline seems to be bottoming.
  • Debt levels are still sustainable.

Neutral:

  • Management is trying its best to diversify away from the media business

 

*I’m not even going to link to it because it’s so bad and they are obviously trying to get you to buy something from them

This August officially marks ten years of investing.

Ten years is a long time and I’ve learnt some things along the way. However, my investing journey is by no means over and I’m pretty sure there are many more things I will have to learn.

This post is going to be a reflection of the steps, missteps and lessons I have learnt so far. (Beware: long post ahead)

How I got started

Investing was something I read about from Rich Dad, Poor Dad. I know the book is controversial (see the criticism the book got) but that’s the first time I even got the idea of being an investor.

However, that idea never really took any shape until one day in 2006 when I saw a flyer on campus that the business school at the National University of Singapore (NUS) was organising a talk by Robert P. Miles. Robert P. Miles was invited to give a talk about his book, Warren Buffett Wealth. That was my first introduction to Warren Buffett.

Subsequently, I read whatever I could find about Warren Buffett and Value Investing. Of course, it didn’t help that I had no idea how to read a financial statement. By nature, I’m not one to go through the details with a fine-toothed comb and I was studying for an undergraduate degree in Economics. Not exactly the kind of major that teaches much about accounting.

Thankfully, the mid-2000s had some resources online. I’m forever grateful to Value Buddies and its predecessors (Wallstraits and subsequently, Afralug). Some of the regulars there have been generously sharing their wealth of experience and that really sped up my learning.

I bought my first stock (technically, it’s a unit since it’s a Reit) in 2007 and still hold it to this day. To be honest, I didn’t buy it because I had great insights or superior analysis of its financial statements. I bought it because I figured that Singapore’s ageing population will be spending a lot more on healthcare in the years to come. Thankfully, that investment has paid off handsomely.

Of course, that investment wasn’t all smooth-sailing. Buying in Aug 2007 meant that basically, I was buying at the top of the market. For those too young to remember*, Aug 2007 was as high as markets got before things started to go to hell. End 2007 to September 2008 was just a long descent into hell and Lehman Brothers’ collapse just caused everything to fall off a cliff.

Getting through the Global Financial Crisis (GFC)

The GFC seemed so long ago but anyone who lived through that would have seen their investments get totally wrecked. I’m pretty sure some of my investments were down by 50-75% at one point.

The silver lining was that having just started out in the market, I didn’t have a lot of skin in the game. In fact, that was the best possible time to commit even more money. So did I make tons of money from that period? Not really. There was always this constant fear of whether the market would go down some more. And by the time, the market was in an uptrend, you start worrying about whether another shock will hit the system.

That, however, provided me with a good understanding and experience of classic market psychology. It’s a lesson that not everyone may learn or may even learn too late. A very senior colleague of mine who made his retirement nest egg in the GFC by buying tonnes of stock at what was almost the market bottom basically sold out in May 2015. He was vindicated by the horrible second half of 2015 but practically missed out on collecting dividend income in 2016 and the run-up in late 2016 till now.** On the contrary, I stayed in the market and my portfolio is roughly 7% higher based on pure investing returns for the same period. In short, market timing is a difficult business.

Investment Record

First off, a disclaimer. I’m not putting my investment record here to brag or in hope that someone will recognise my prowess and give me a job. In fact, you’ll see that my record is nothing to brag about. My objective is to show that any average person can achieve decent returns in the market with a solid plan, plenty of patience and a decent understanding of markets.

In 2007, I started with a portfolio of roughly $6,000. This may not seem like much but I can assure you that it was a substantial sum to a university undergraduate at that time. Unfortunately, I was young and not smart enough to know what records to keep and where to keep them (this was all before we had cheap gigabytes and cloud storage) so I only kept records of how much my portfolio was growing. It was only in early 2011 that I began to keep records of both my investment returns (that is pure investing returns not inflated by me adding more money) as well as the actual growth of my portfolio.

From 2011 till now, my investment returns (capital gains and dividends reinvested) or what’s more commonly known as Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) is about 7.51%. However, the actual growth of my portfolio is 18.85% p.a. for the same period.***

So what gives? As I’ve said before elsewhere on this blog, that big difference is down to mainly two things: (1) I started from a low base. In early 2011, my portfolio was below six-figure territory. Just by saving $1,000 a month, that would increase my portfolio by somewhere about 12%. (2) Savings are key to building your portfolio because that acts as a buffer or insurance. When markets are down, that continual addition to the war chest helps you add positions when the markets are cheap. When markets are expensive, you just build up your cash position to take advantage of when markets (eventually) get cheaper.

Obviously, as time goes by, your savings will contribute less and less towards your portfolio growth. The growth in your portfolio will come to consist of only your investment returns and that shouldn’t really be a cause for concern because when that time comes, you will probably have reached your financial goals. In fact, the more you save each month, the quicker you will reach financial freedom assuming of course that your spending stays the same after having zero income.

Three steps to get started

Step one, read as much as you can. You should not be reading about the theoretical or technical knowledge regarding investments but as much of the history, different schools of thoughts, and the different participants in the markets. In other words, don’t just know how to read the financial statements of a company and be able to do all the not-so-fancy calculations but start to appreciate how markets used to be and how they are now.

Also, not everyone in the market is an investor. Even among investors, there is substantial variation with regards to how long-term an investor’s view is. Get to know how traders and speculators behave because invariably, the siren song of being a speculator is tempting and you need to know when you call yourself an investor while acting more like a speculator. Traders have their place in the market but you have to know if you have brains and fortitude to be one.

Step two, just do it. I’m sorry for borrowing Nike’s slogan but there is really no better time to get started. As long as you are using money that you are prepared to do without for 10 years or more, being in the markets should not be an issue.

Step three, keeping learning and getting continuos feedback. Feedback doesn’t just come from the markets. You should seek out like-minded individuals who want to better themselves. ValueBuddies.com is a valuable place. There are plenty of investment bloggers (e.g. kyith at Investment Moats, Dividend Warrior) out there as well who maintain a good conversation with people who leave comments on their blog.

Environmental factors

A note of caution for those trying to replicate my model. Your investment portfolio cannot exist in a vacuum. If my wife was a high-maintenance trophy wife, the portfolio definitely wouldn’t be where it is today.

Fortunately for me, my wife was raised in a very practical household with parents who are the most down-to-earth people one would ever meet. Our expenses are minimal and our housing expense is way below our means. In a world where mortgages can stretch up to 30 years, we only have 5 years left on your mortgage despite only having bought the place a few years ago.

Of course, circumstances vary among households but I believe that contrary to what most people say about the average person living in Singapore, we are living proof that staying in Singapore doesn’t have to be an exorbitant affair.****

What’s the end goal?

My personal goal is to have my portfolio provide enough income for me and my wife to meet our expenses. These could range from daily expenses such as utilities and groceries to one-off expenses such as medical emergencies and holidays.

Once that goal is met, we will have much more options on how we want to live our lives. I don’t know about my wife but I certainly would explore my creative side much more. I have dabbled in some of these things recently but I really would want to pick up some skills like drawing/sketching, creating web apps, dabble a little in simple DIY tech-related craft (like using a raspberry pi as a security cam), baking bread and cooking at a more advanced level.  Or as my students might put it, I want to become a pro at these things.

If you’ve been following this blog, you will realise the slowdown in postings. I won’t be blogging as much as before because of impending changes on the job front as well as this minor obsession I’ve developed on programming.

Good luck investing! Here’s to the next 10 years.

Endnotes:

*I feel weird saying this but I do have some students who have just gotten in the market and for whom the GFC of 08/09 seem like a distant memory.

**Of course, financial planners will rightly tell you that your age profile matters when it comes to asset allocation. However, converting almost your entire portfolio to cash is not a valid retirement strategy either with interest rates on cash being so low and inflation for seniors (healthcare) being higher than the general inflation rate.

***My investment portfolio consists only of stocks and cash. I haven’t included my property, CPF monies and other assets such as insurance-based financial products that could be surrendered for cash.

****We are by no means extremely frugal people. If I wanted to go to that extreme, I would not have gotten a car and we wouldn’t be taking yearly or even twice yearly holidays to places like Japan, London and my favourite retreat off Bintan.

There’s a mystery in my current organisation that I’ve been trying to solve.

Currently, my organisation offers employees who reach the official retirement age of 62 years a one-year contract for the next three years. There is even an option to have that extended to 67. Of course, the employee has to meet certain performance requirements before these options are offered.

Some additional context

My organisation doesn’t offer a pension upon retirement. Singapore has a compulsory savings scheme called the Central Provident Fund (CPF) where workers have a certain portion of their monthly salary socked away until they hit a certain age.

Also, the colleagues in question are not low or even average-pay workers. They would easily be considered middle to upper-middle class folk for the last 20 or 30 years of their careers.

The mystery and my theories

The mystery for me is not what my organisation offers but why would my colleagues want to take that offer up in the first place. I have a few theories but none seem to be wholly satisfactory.

Theory #1: They need the money

One possible reason could be that some colleagues who work until 62 and beyond do so because they need to. In other words, if they retired at 62, they would have problems funding their retirement.

I’m not very satisfied with this theory because I’m pretty sure most of my colleagues have enough put away for the rest of their lives. Furthermore, most of their liabilities such as housing loan(s) and children’s education (yes, in this part of the world, parents usually pay for their education if they can afford to do so) would have already been settled.

Also, if you can’t afford to retire at 62 years old, then is another three to five years going to matter? It might also have been that many moons ago, these colleagues planned their retirement up till 65 or 67 and therefore, they are near the end but not quite. In that case, isn’t that level of planning a little suspect? What person plans to the exact year without having a buffer of some sort?

Theory #2: Retirement is boring

I can understand this sentiment. If you look around, there are many people who say that once their professional lives are over, their minds degenerate quickly because there is nothing to keep them engaged. This is a particular statement many elderly businesspeople make.

The flip side for my older colleagues is that interests can be cultivated or expanded. In fact, most of us have other interests outside of our professional lives. Wouldn’t retirement free up a lot of time to pursue those other interests in a bigger way?

Many older colleagues also tend to be grandparents and I’m sure their children would appreciate their help in taking care of the grandkids. Or maybe it’s finally time for my older colleagues to go out and see the world.

Theory #3: They love the job

Truth be told, there are some colleagues who fall into this category. They love the interaction with their students so much so that they don’t want to step away from it. However, the job isn’t all fun and games. There are many mundane administrative aspects to the job as well as the boring and utilitarian committee work that we’re all forced to be a part of. If they really love the job, they could always become a freelancer. This would allow them to focus on the teaching without having to be a huge part of all the administrative machinery.

If they love the administrative machinations, then that’s a whole other story but which begs the question- why not be part of an administration somewhere else instead? Other administrations would probably pay better.

Also, teaching doesn’t have to be confined to the classroom or the school. Sharing knowledge and guiding others happens digitally and in other venues such as religious organisations as well.

Conclusion

Those are my theories and none of them seems particularly satisfactory. From the viewpoint of a 30-something year old who’s been here for about five years, I can’t imagine why anyone would want to stay until 62. The only sane thing is that they really can’t bear to leave this place because of the joy of work. Therefore, my money is on theory #2 or #3 although there are some holes in that argument.

Having said that, if I could, I would go when I’m ready. After all, age really is just a number. If I was financially free, I would be doing what interests me or what is meaningful regardless of the amount of money it brings me.

So I woke up this morning (14 June 2017) to find the beginnings of a soap drama playing out on my Facebook feed. The entire blogosphere basically got into a frenzy about this news and the mainstream media was caught off-guard with the post released in the wee hours of the morning. This is just the beginning of the entire affair.

 

LWL_fbpost

The post that started the drama.

 

In case you missed it

 

So it appears that Lee Wei Ling (LWL) and her younger brother, Lee Hsien Yang (LHY) are not happy with PM Lee Hsien Loong (LHL) and his wife, Ho Ching’s behaviour with regards to the late Lee Kuan Yew’s residence.

The statement started off with some very serious allegations of misuse of power and harbouring political ambitions for PM Lee’s elder son. However, that part was very short on details and most of the statement centered around PM Lee and his siblings’ differences with regards to the treatment of their late father’s house at Oxley Road.

What does it all mean?

After reading the full 6-page statement and PM Lee’s response, here are my thoughts:

  • It seemed petty to be arguing over a house but I guess the larger picture here is not so much the house but LWL and LHY’s attempt to paint LHL as a power-hungry person to the extent that he is willing to go against his father’s last wishes. And in doing so, would be detrimental to the future of Singapore.
  • LWL and LHY are obviously not very good terms with LHL any longer. Going public with what is essentially a family matter is damaging to well-known personalities as all three of them are. Arguably, this is most damaging to LHL as compared to LWL or LHY.
  • The allegations of big brother being omnipresent are most probably exaggerated but if true, is a worrying sign of a paranoid personality who needs to be in control at all costs.
  • LWL seems to be the one with the least to gain or lose from this. LHL has quite a bit to lose- he can’t sue his siblings (can he?), those anti-PAP or even fence-sitters may see the allegations as somewhat truthful since it is ‘insider info’, the general public may question his ability to lead if he can’t even get his own brother and sister to back him, and most crucial, his son’s entry into politics, if at all, is now going to be tougher to push through. However, the upside is that he probably plans to step down sooner rather than later anyway.
  • LHY is the question mark here. Given that his son, Li Shengwu has also spoken out on the matter, could it have been a case of LHL not helping his nephew enter politics or is this setting the stage for Shengwu’s entry later on?
  • LWL and LHY’s naming of Lawrence Wong as a figure in all this, if true, just confirms most people’s suspicions that LHL’s cabinet has some yes-men in there. The question is who else and how many? Not the best vote of confidence for the whoever takes over from LHL.
  • In my opinion, LHL’s official response wasn’t the best. It sounded sad and defeated and although he tried to say that his siblings’ hitting the nuclear option tarnished his dad’s legacy, I’m not sure many people would connect the dots. After all, his siblings were accusing him of departing from the path his dad took and he didn’t really do much to refute what they said.
  • LWL and LHY were pretty nice actually that they didn’t bring in any personal anecdotes on Ho Ching overstepping her boundaries. Why? To help their big brother save some face? Or to not give LHL any ammo to sue them for? I guess we’ll never know.

I can sympathise with LHL because I have witnessed some drama in my own extended family. Of course, my own family is nothing like the Lees but the similarities in terms of the clash of egos and views are there. No one would ever wish that the full story gets out and to be honest, no one’s going to be interested anyway.

All in, LWL and LHY really hit the nuclear option with this one. LHY is never going to come back to Singapore after this and dropping this bombshell of a statement while LHL was away on holiday shows how much of a calculated move this was. Bringing LHL’s son into the picture also blocks his son’s entry into politics, if it was on the cards, for the short term. With the upcoming presidential election and next General Election, this release was designed to inflict maximum damage. As for LWL and LHY, I guess they don’t really have much to lose in the first place which explains why they did it in the first place.

The plot twist now would be that this was all done so that whoever manages to bring the family back together will be the next PM.

 

No, I’m not that gifted an investment writer to give you such a resource.

Instead, pop over to this gem by Investment Moats to learn more about Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs).

The Sunday edition of the Straits Times has the Invest section which was the only real reason that I read anything in the Straits Times. I use the word ‘was’ because I haven’t gone through the paper in a very long time. The main reason is that I had access to copies of the Straits Times get a little more restricted and to be honest, the content in the Invest section seems to have gotten a little less useful.

Take the latest exhibit, The real cost of avocado toast. The article is obviously riding on the trend of bashing the guy who advised millennials to cut back on avocado toast in order to save for a downpayment on a house. The article does rightly point out that cutting back on certain habits every day and letting that extra savings compound will help you get quite a bit richer.

The problem with such advice is not that it’s wrong but that it doesn’t really provide you with a solution for getting it to work. It’s like telling an overweight person to eat less otherwise the chances of dying early gets higher. It’s good advice but the more important thing is how is the person supposed to use the advice to get results?

Since the article rightly points out that people need to cut back on certain habits, we must also acknowledge the fact that habits are hard to break. It takes a lot of willpower or an insanely good strategy to avoid going back onto the wrong path.

This is where I’ve found that it’s much easier to focus on how much you want to save each month and set up a standing instruction with your bank that automatically transfers that sum to an account that is relatively less liquid. i.e. You don’t normally use that account for daily spending.

Any monies that are left in the account after the automatic transfer to the ‘savings’ account is then left for spending. It’s that simple. People often think that this is not doable but I am willing to bet that it’s possible for the average person. After all, in Singapore, 23% of your monthly income gets put in your Central Providend Fund (CPF)* account and we’ve pretty much learned to live with that ‘savings rate’ of 23%.

So, try it. Start with transferring 10% of your monthly income to an account that you won’t touch unless you absolutely have to and have as much avocado toast you want with what’s left.