4 min read
How is it that searching for a home online in 2024 is the same as 2008
It is the year 2024.
I can create a photo of a cat riding a motorcycle in the fields of Timbuktu with a click of a button (which looks pretty good, if you ask me).
But that’s old news.
You can even now create realistic videos, by just typing out words with the recently announced Sora.
See here:
And with all this advancement in technology, it seems utterly insane to me that the experience of searching for a home online is still… strangely archaic. For those who remember what finding a home on PropertyGuru was like in the 2000s, it really hasn’t changed all that much.
Sure, it looks sleeker today. You can view videos from listings, and there may be a lot more filters to sieve through the listings.
There are new “features” now too, like how it so helpfully showcases listings nearby, even when I painstakingly selected a specific development to look at. Because obviously, what I really wanted was to see every other place but the one I’m interested in.
But my biggest issue is that there’s still no solution to combat fake listings.
It seems crazy to me that we are living in the year 2024, and there’s still no way to validate if what I’m looking at is a real listing. Or when was it actually listed (unless I’ve been on the site every day and remember each listing specifically), or if there were price drops or price changes.
There was supposedly some grand plan to create a unique serial number for each property. They even announced the formation of an Alliance for Action (AfA) on Accurate Property Listings. Because we know that every serious plan needs an acronym in Singapore, right?
Funnily enough, here’s the opening sentence of the article: “Home seekers will soon no longer have to sift through dummy and duplicate property listings when looking for homes on property listing portals.” I was excited when I first read about this in 2021, but nearly 3 years on, I’m now left wondering what is a reasonable duration to expect when someone uses the word soon.
The situation gets worse – or what you may say as tragic for anyone genuinely trying to find a place to call home. In an age where our phones can capture a rogue streaker atop Marina Bay Sands, why do the photos of these listings look like they were taken with a potato?
It’s baffling, to say the least. Singapore prides itself on efficiency and innovation, yet here we are, stuck in a loop of inefficiency that feels straight out of the last decade.
But hey, I suppose it’s not all doom and gloom. With every fake listing we stumble upon, we refine our skills in spotting the real deals. And maybe, just maybe, the powers that be will catch up with us, bringing the promised changes to fruition. Until then, we keep trudging through the mire, armed with our skepticism and a keen eye for the genuine article.
In the meantime, if you’re navigating this minefield, here are a few typical red flags to keep in mind (read the whole piece here, if you want):
- Look out for digital renderings. If it looks too good to be true, it probably is.
- Using previous photos of the place. Ask clearly in your correspondence with the agents before making a wasted trip – are these the current photos of the home?
- Just using stock photos – if they can’t make an effort to dress up the listing, it’s either it is priced so well they don’t need to (and you need to be wary too), or it just plainly isn’t real.
- Claims of sea/park/greenery views, but photos don’t show it.
The search for a home in Singapore is a journey fraught with pitfalls, but it’s not without its rewards. Keep your wits about you, and don’t lose hope. The perfect home is out there – it just might take a bit of digging to find it.
Until next time, keep those eyes peeled and stay savvy.
For more property news this week:
- Given Lentor Mansion is one of the bigger new launches this year, all eyes are on it to see how it performs. Here’s our review on its pricing and comparisons
- It’s sad that they don’t make maisonettes anymore. But for those who still lust after one, here’s a look at where to find the cheapest ones in Singapore.
- $1,200 psf for a new condo? Sounds crazy, but this was just a couple of years ago. Someone just made nearly a million dollar at Treasure at Tampines – here’s how.
Some condos are exactly the same size, but the layout can be so different. Check out just how.
Weekly Sales Roundup (04 March – 10 March)
Top 5 Most Expensive New Sales (By Project)
| PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE |
| WATTEN HOUSE | $6,092,000 | 1851 | $3,290 | FH |
| KLIMT CAIRNHILL | $5,600,000 | 1496 | $3,743 | FH |
| THE RESERVE RESIDENCES | $3,955,368 | 1625 | $2,434 | 99 yrs (2021) |
| PINETREE HILL | $3,712,000 | 1464 | $2,536 | 99 yrs (2022) |
| GRAND DUNMAN | $3,509,000 | 1432 | $2,451 | 99 yrs (2022) |
Top 5 Cheapest New Sales (By Project)
| PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE |
| LENTORIA | $1,473,000 | 732 | $2,012 | 99 yrs |
| 10 EVELYN | $1,481,370 | 495 | $2,992 | FH |
| HILLHAVEN | $1,492,175 | 721 | $2,069 | 99 yrs (2023) |
| THE MYST | $1,514,000 | 678 | $2,233 | 99 yrs (2023) |
| ONE BERNAM | $1,548,000 | 463 | $3,344 | 99 yrs (2019) |
Top 5 Most Expensive Resale
| PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE |
| CORALS AT KEPPEL BAY | $8,700,000 | 2971 | $2,928 | 99 yrs (2007) |
| ORCHARD BEL AIR | $5,200,000 | 3251 | $1,600 | 99 yrs (1980) |
| GARDENVILLE | $4,980,000 | 2583 | $1,928 | FH |
| THE LEGEND | $3,900,000 | 2164 | $1,803 | FH |
| D’LEEDON | $3,650,000 | 1399 | $2,608 | 99 yrs (2010) |
Top 5 Cheapest Resale
| PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE |
| RIPPLE BAY | $717,000 | 484 | $1,480 | 99 yrs (2011) |
| PARC BOTANNIA | $740,000 | 431 | $1,719 | 99 yrs (2016) |
| LA FIESTA | $750,000 | 452 | $1,659 | 99 yrs (2012) |
| THE MINTON | $818,000 | 560 | $1,461 | 99 yrs (2007) |
| BARTLEY RESIDENCES | $828,000 | 463 | $1,789 | 99 yrs (2011) |
Top 5 Biggest Winners
| PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | RETURNS | HOLDING PERIOD |
| THE LEGEND | $3,900,000 | 2164 | $1,803 | $2,100,000 | 23 Years |
| GARDENVILLE | $4,980,000 | 2583 | $1,928 | $2,083,350 | 25 Years |
| TEMBELING CENTRE | $3,000,000 | 2153 | $1,394 | $1,710,000 | 14 Years |
| BOTANNIA | $2,700,000 | 1561 | $1,730 | $1,470,000 | 15 Years |
| THE SPRINGBLOOM | $2,058,000 | 1302 | $1,580 | $1,404,000 | 25 Years |
Top 5 Biggest Losers
| PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | RETURNS | HOLDING PERIOD |
| HORIZON RESIDENCES | $2,300,000 | 1356 | $1,696 | -$128,570 | 12 Year |
| KINGSFORD WATERBAY | $985,000 | 689 | $1,430 | -$26,170 | 6 Years |
| KILLINEY 118 | $1,280,000 | 624 | $2,050 | $42,000 | 5 Years |
| ONEROBEY | $1,588,000 | 1195 | $1,329 | $49,000 | 11 Years |
| THE FLORENCE RESIDENCES | $1,050,000 | 635 | $1,653 | $53,000 | 3 Years |
Transaction Breakdown
For more on property news and updates in Singapore, follow us at Stacked.
