Singapore income tax highest in the world???

last SG · 2003-10-10T14:19:04+00:00

Good, u have finally answer the question. Now it is finally my turn to shoot """ Fifthly, if DEMAND exceed SUPPLY - meaning 50,000 buyers to only a small qu...

stupidissmart SG

I believe u have not answer the possibility of people bidding over the quota level. Who will have priority then ? If there r 10 people wanting to buy 1 car ownership from a car dealer, then who will be given priority as to who get the ownership ? I don't see why won't the dealer buy in as much ownership as possible, since the actual level of demand is tat high. I don't believe u can safely say tat it won't happened.

If u force car user to stock in in great quantities, then there will have lesser dealers buying the cars, resulting in easier monopolisation and a trend tat only the big companies can afford. There are more than 50 car companies selling used or new cars. If u split up into bigger shares, maybe into 10 groups, then some companies may end up with 0 cars ownership meaning they can't sell any cars within tat month. 5 million may mean a big amount to u and small corporation, but it is peanuts to big companies.

Since ownership can be transferable, how do u prevent people from "investing" in COE ? Will it end up like shares or trading commodities where people buy in at cheap proces and sell it when it goes up ? If I can't sell them off at a good price tis month, I am sure I will keep them for another few month before selling it. It will be like trading commodities in the sense tat they have 'expiry' dates.

Please answer these question if u ever want to argue about controling supply chain again.

stupidissmart SG

Anyway if each month gov bring in 5000 cars. If u split it into 500 each, then only 10 groups will have the ownership. If u split into 1000 slots each, then only 5 groups will have it. How do u prevent 100 smaller players to formed a party together to buy in 1000 or 500 shares ?

stupidissmart SG

Last point:

If COE does get overhaul, then cars will be cheaper for people, tat is true. However the revenues of Gov will be lower. In tis sense, they will have to increase tax to counter balance tis, which means they may introduce higher GST, higher income tax, increase fares of public transport etc.

In such sense, I believe tat COE can be considered a tax, a tax for the rich or otherwise the desperate for cars. This seems to be a fairer way of tax as it will affect the rich directly. It will also moltivate people to work harder to own a car of their dream. If u scrape it, u only end up hurting the poor

Atobe SG

What is the objective of DEMAND side quota (COE), or SUPPLY side quota ?

If 5000 vehicles can only benefit 5000 BUYERS only, does it really matter if this 5000 vehicles (divided into whatever smaller lots) benefit whatever numbers of dealership ?

Someone has to loose out on the opportunity to buy a car, so does it matter if some dealership sell more, or sell nothing at all ?

If fairness is to be done, then divide into smaller quota lots of 25 or 50 vehicles per quota permit, so as to allow more dealership to have its share.

With each quota applied for, the price of the next quota can be made available at 20 percent higher; or at whatever an amount higher, so as to make it financially demanding to prevent greedy bidding to buy out all the quota by any single dealership.

The problem with the COE system is that it is the BUYER that is punished for its insatiable appetite to own a vehicle. The dealership is not hurt in anyway. With most of the COE bidding being made through Dealerships, the price of the COE can be manipulated by unnecessary biddings at higher prices.

With SUPPLY side quota control, any Dealership will have to think hard before committing capital into holding the stocks that it has planned to sell within a certain period.

Obviously, with the cost of the quota being made lower, the fiscal collection numbers will be much lower, since the DECLARED Primary Objective is to control the growth of the vehicle population, and not as a fiscal measure that allow the Government to have a regular windfall.

The other declared Government statement was that when ERP is in place, COE, ARF, PARF and any other fiscal measures to limit car growth will be removed.

The Government is aware of the impact of such a move, but have got themselves addicted to the large amount of money collected with every COE bid.

This SUPPLY side quota control mechanism will actually benefit the Government by not losing out completely when it removed its other fiscal measures (COE, ARF, PARF) to control the growth of the vehicle population.

The figures or quota lot size are not dead figures and can be adjusted. This idea can be tweaked further.

This is only a suggestion that may not necessarily be the final solution, but it sure beat the ridiculous Singaporean craze in paying up to $50,000 and more, for a COE that is not worth the piece of paper that it is printed on.

stupidissmart SG

As I say, tat idea is stupid. I ask again, if 50000 bid and there is only 5000 for tis month quota, then how ? Who get to have the car ?

U wanna talk about a method to prevent gov to make money, u might as well suggest people go to ballot for it. IF 50000 apply for 500 slots, then u will have a 1% chance of getting the car. Isn't tat more simple and fair ?? Controlling supply side is silly as in the end everything will be the same.

As I say, tis is a fair way to tax the people. If u want to deprive the Gov from collecting COE, they still have to earn tat money and they will employ ways to get it back by taxing on other areas. They do announce tat COE money go into the budget right ? They announce it together with their other tax. Don't u think tis is better than raising property tax or GST ?

Atobe SG

Hi "stupidissmart", so we cross path again.

If 50,000 people were to demand from a Dealership that has dared to only successfully bid for a quota allocation of 500 cars - in a SUPPLY side scheme - do you think it will be a good PR exercise for the Dealership to get around this difficulty by holding a balloting exercise to determine who will be the lucky 500 new owners ?

Like I mentioned, this idea and the solutions offered may not be the final and best approach, but at least it beats the stupidity of paying the peak price of $50,000 PLUS for a piece of paper called COE, just to own a vehicle for only TEN YEARS.

Is it so difficult to stretch the STUPIDITY of this idea - of SUPPLY side control - with a SMART change in perspective ?

Why do you insist on having to participate in a COE bidding system that is NOT TRANSPARENT, and with the bid prices being suspiciously manipulated when convenient or to suit some agenda ?

Have you not noticed that each time when a fleet of taxis - (from any one of the GLC owned taxi companies) - is due for replacement, the COE will co-incidentally come sliding down to levels that are up to $10,000 lower then normal.

If you believe that being stupid is smart surely this stupid idea is also a smart idea as an alternative to the COE system ?

Or do you believe that being honest and admit the creativity of a new idea can damage your credo of stupid-is-smart ?

stupidissmart SG

I never say anything about dealership in regard to balloting. As I say many times before, tat is stupid idea, making the ownership chain only longer. Read carefully below.

The gov will hold a ballot for the owner themselves to ballot it out. The application form for each ballot come in $100 or watever the gov want, and the people, if they wanna increase their chances, can buy more application form and try out their luck (tis is to prevent people from using other people IC to ballot). Of course if they got the ownership, they cannot transfer their ownership and have to get a car by tis month. (to avoid investors since it is only to themselves, tis time). There can be another alternative to those who must absolutely get their car within tis month. They get to pay the full COE, or a fixed min price fixed by gov.

U haven't say anything about preventing people from investing in COE in your case since now ownership can be transferable, neither has u say anything about wat happened when there is an over bidding from the dealership in your case. U fail to answer any of my questions, why will I be satisfied with your suggestions ? Frankly I do not see any value added in your proposal. Please answer these 7 issues I have stated down to convince me.

1) If 50000 bids from dealers for 5000 gov quota, who get to have the 5000 ownership ? Those who bid more or they have go to ballot box again Very Happy This is a very crucial question, please answer it. If u don't it means your argument doesn't hold any water as tis is the source of Gov problem, demand is more than supply.

2)If dealer sell 700 cars tis month, they will certainly bid for 1000 COE if one must bid in denominators of 500. I won't aim to sell 500 as I can easily sell 700. I will want to increase my profits isn't it. Thus overbidding will occurs easily. I can use my spouse's, parent's IC to bid to avoid the issue of being charged more for extra bidding isn't it ? If u need a car dealership license, I will register a car dealership business with my spouse's name and again use it to buy ownership. To register a business now take about $100 only.

3)If 500 people band together to buy 500 COE, using one person name, then won't it be the same case as the normal COE we use ?

4)If dealer really buy in $10000 per COE from the gov tat month, we will expect them to sell at $15000 isn't it ? Can u blame them ? They r taking risks in buying COEs isn't it, thus should expect a profit as they may iccur a lose too. Wat if tat store is the only store tat sell mercedes, or watever brand and model in Singapore ? They will then have more flexibility in charging the price of COEs isn't it ?

5) wat if again 5000 potential car owners wanna buy the 500 COE from a dealer. How does he decide who get to have the ownership ? He of course will give the ownership to people tat had bid in more money, as dealers r profit orientated isn't it ? How do u stop tat ?

6) in such a case, then won't tat seems to be like investing ? I will buy the COE, keep till it reaches a high price and sell it off to earn a profit. Tat will only make things worse for car consumers in Singapore. How do u prevent tat ?

7) And lastly, another thing which u avoid to answer, is why deprive Gov from collecting COE ? They in the end will spend the same and will seek to increase tax from other areas which will affect everyone, including the poor. Isn't COE a good way to tax people ?

If it is a lousy idea, face it and humbly step down.

Atobe SG

The very idea of a NON-TRANSPARENT COE bidding system is abhorrent, and my reply as to why the SUPPLY SIDE control mechanism with a fixed LOWER BASE PRICE is more advantageous has been quite clearly explained.

The OBJECTIVE of the COE system is a CONTROLLED growth of the car population, which has now TURN OUT to be a MONEY SPINNER for the Government, and hurting the Singaporean Car Owners, who have NO CHOICE but to submit themselves to an ARTIFICIALLY IMPOSED ENVIRONMENT.

Need I go further to address the supposedly Government promoted merits that you seem to have been deeply infatuated with.

1) If 50000 bids from dealers for 5000 gov quota, who get to have the 5000 ownership ? Those who bid more or they have go to ballot box again This is a very crucial question, please answer it. If u don't it means your argument doesn't hold any water as tis is the source of Gov problem, demand is more than supply.

2)If dealer sell 700 cars tis month, they will certainly bid for 1000 COE if one must bid in denominators of 500. I won't aim to sell 500 as I can easily sell 700. I will want to increase my profits isn't it. Thus overbidding will occurs easily. I can use my spouse's, parent's IC to bid to avoid the issue of being charged more for extra bidding isn't it ? If u need a car dealership license, I will register a car dealership business with my spouse's name and again use it to buy ownership. To register a business now take about $100 only.

That is the trouble with the present COE bid system, in which the Dealership is left with the option to pay up the balance of the COE NOT WITH THE BID.

In a SUPPLY SIDE control mechanism - if you had take the care to read clearly - the Dealership will have to pay immediately on successful award of the quota that he had bid for.

The Dealership will have to plan carefully his cash flow, capital cost, existing stock against future stock positions and sales, and a whole host of consideration; where at present the entire cost is passed onto the Car Owners desperately willing to be subjected to a NO-CHOICE situation.

3)If 500 people band together to buy 500 COE, using one person name, then won't it be the same case as the normal COE we use ?

4)If dealer really buy in $10000 per COE from the gov tat month, we will expect them to sell at $15000 isn't it ? Can u blame them ? They r taking risks in buying COEs isn't it, thus should expect a profit as they may iccur a lose too. Wat if tat store is the only store tat sell mercedes, or watever brand and model in Singapore ? They will then have more flexibility in charging the price of COEs isn't it ?

The difference with the COE system is that the buyers money is involved while the Dealership only pay a token fee at bidding time. In a SUPPLY SIDE situation the Dealership will have to pay for the FULL AMOUNT UP FRONT when the quota is awarded.

Who is to stop the Dealership from making a quick buck with the SUPPLY SIDE quota bid price ? At least, the mark-up will be from a lower base price instead of 5-digits being paid for a COE.

5) wat if again 5000 potential car owners wanna buy the 500 COE from a dealer. How does he decide who get to have the ownership ? He of course will give the ownership to people tat had bid in more money, as dealers r profit orientated isn't it ? How do u stop tat ?

Did you even bother to read my earlier post before your reply ?

Did you not read about the balloting that the Dealer can exercise ? What is to stop the Dealership from taking on more then one quota lot ?

6) in such a case, then won't tat seems to be like investing ? I will buy the COE, keep till it reaches a high price and sell it off to earn a profit. Tat will only make things worse for car consumers in Singapore. How do u prevent tat ?

Again, the SUPPLY SIDE quota system will require the Dealership to pay the full value of his bid price on the successful award of the quota amount bidded. In such a situation, speculative instinct will be moderated, as the interest paid on capital spent for the quota bid price will have to be considered. What is there to prevent the bid price from falling (similarly in the COE system) ? Will the Dealership dare to speculate with a SUPPLY SIDE quota control system ?

7) And lastly, another thing which u avoid to answer, is why deprive Gov from collecting COE ? They in the end will spend the same and will seek to increase tax from other areas which will affect everyone, including the poor. Isn't COE a good way to tax people ?

Are you sure you are speaking for the benefit of every car owner in desiring the Government from collecting a recurring windfall with every batch of COE being released ? How sure are you that every cent collected goes to pay for all the good of all Singaporeans ?

Ask again if the COE was intended to be a TAX COLLECTION MECHANISM when it was first initiated ?

If it is a lousy idea, face it and humbly step down.

Glad to see that you no longer address this idea as being "Stupid" but have promoted it to a level of being "Lousy", not so sure if it is being "smart" on your part to do so.

Like I have mentioned, this is not the FINAL and END-ALL SOLUTION, but an alternative idea to the COE system which is NON-TRANSPARENT, and is now being manipulated by the Government against its ORIGINAL OBJECTIVE of using it to CONTROL THE GROWTH OF THE CAR POPULATION in Singapore.

The Government is increasing the COE Quota with every exercise, because the revenue collected is so lucrative.

pikamaster SG

Idea i recently read a bk that said that if all companies introduced Flexitime, it would solve all traffic problems, rendering measures like COE n ERP unnecessary. think abt it, that makes *alot* of sense. fi everyone went to work at different times (and had different free times), there would be fewer cars on any one road in any one time. thus, i think that instead of increasing car tax and road tax, gahmen shud try increasing the number of companies carrying out Flexitime. after all, everything in this world is related.

the (young and enthusiastic) pikamaster

"a butterfly flapping its wings gently in China creates a gale in Canada."
-some ancient traditional saying

stupidissmart SG

I think u r the one tat fail to read clearly bah, from your stupid reply of telling me your idea again. If u really like to personally attack my nick, and if u really seems to have nolstagic for the word 'stupid' , I will peppered the use of it up in here so tat it is more suitable for u

First, wat make u think the dealership r so poor as they can't afford to buy in the cheaper version of COE ? They can afford to buy in cars, they can afford the many squre feet of showroom and people, wat make u think they cannot come up with $50,000, or $100,000 if need be ? I think their renovation come up to at least a 100 thousands ! As I have said, they will buy according to how much cars they sold per month. If they sell 700, they will order 800 COE isn't it ? They have to raise tat money through bank through loans watever if they really do not have the cash. Don't tell me because if they can't afford it, then buy in only 50 right ! Isn't tat stupid ? Then they just had to work for 3 days tat month and close shop as they sell out all the COE,and had to wait till the next COE bidding day !!!

All your stupid crap just keep rotating about tis big assumption tat u have. The demand will be lesser than the supply set by quota. Can u 100% say tat it will always happen ? Wat fiance sort of crap is just plain crap as wat I have explained earlier, they fixed the number of COE bought by their sale volume. If quota cannot fulfil the demand of bidders, which it highly likely will, then wat is your solution ? Please don't come up with answer such as "it won't happened lah because bla bla bla". Lets say it happened already, wat r u going to do ? Answer it to the point ! How does Gov do its selection !

In the end, if without using the ballot box, the quota sent to Gov will still rise due to high demand, and in the end they will charge a high price to dealer and in the end they will pass the cost to the consumer. Wat u have done is just add another link to the chain, another rung of ladder for the consumer. U in fact just increase the complications and the coffers of the dealer. Tis will make other poeple invest in COE too, which they will push up the price,increasing the demand of COE. Gov will have to raise the price again since demand is greater now. Wat have your stupid idea come to ? Higher COE !

U better read point 2 again. If I need to buy in more quota lot, I will not just use my name but my relatives', employees' name, my spouse name to buy ownership too. Then won't it forfeit your stupid idea of charging more for additional lots u buy ?

Another argument against your stupid fixed quota size. If a brand mitsubishi sell 700 cars a month, and he deicded to buy only 500 COE because they will be "overcharged" from your great idea previously, while BMW sell 300 a month and force to buy 500 COE as there aren't any other smaller denominators suggested by u again. Suppose I wanted to buy a mitsubish. But in the end I was turned down as it has ran out of COE, I will be forced to buy BMW tat month isn't it ? Does your fixed quota make any sense then ?? If I am importing Porche, importing a or 2 car per month, how much lots should I buy then ?

Read point 5 carefully again,

Why will dealer ever choose balloting when he can go for aunctioning tat will give him more profit ? They r profit orientated isn't it ? Business is meant to make money, they r not here doing charity. Only can Gov to do such things direct to car owners,as wat I have suggested previously.

U really underestimate the potential of dealing with COE. Singapore definitely will have people buying cars right ? And the demand will be much greater than the quota given by Gov. The real price will definitely be higher than the "proposed" lower price u want the gov to set. The demand for COE will be the push factor for maintaining the price. Paying upright may be very difficult to u, but there r tons of rich guys around in Singapore using money to buy property, shares and etc. If your only deterent is just having a large capital, then I have to say it won't work. If the return is high, no matter how much the price is, people will invest in it. In the case u r really stupid, there r people investing hundreds of thousands to a mere business plan just to have the hope of getting back the money in a matter of many years, and the risk of losing it all is very great. I don't see why they will not buy the relatively safer COE for investment instead. If Gov quota is 5000, and each cost $1000, I think it is easy to monopolise the market using the many relatives' IC approach, needing only just $5 million dollars in capital. U again think tat is huge ? Then u really have to start work in a fiance company boy.

Why is the COE not open and transparent to u ? The price is really paid by how much they bid, and the expected price is shown on the net everyday. Wat part is invinsible to u ? R u going to ask from Gov for something not practical again ?

The idea is not about how the Gov spend tax money, it is about if Gov should use tis method to gather tax money. Do u think tis is a bad way of taxing ?

U feel tat the money is not well spent by Gov when it collect COE as tax. U think u will do a better job ? From your stupid suggestion for COE, I can see how good your problem solving ability is. Your suggestion has no value added in it, creating more problems and u refuse to face tat point. Go back, read my 7 points again and reply instead of re-telling everyone wat your idea is all about again. Please answer my first point. This is third time I ask u to reply tat question.

Frankly I can not even see a single advantage nor any feasibility compared to the old COE method. Too much loop holes and not well thought, I think u better start from formula again.

Atobe SG

If they sell 700, they will order 800 COE isn't it ? They have to raise tat money through bank through loans watever if they really do not have the cash. Don't tell me because if they can't afford it, then buy in only 50 right ! Isn't tat stupid ? Then they just had to work for 3 days tat month and close shop as they sell out all the COE,and had to wait till the next COE bidding day !!!

You say that "Don't tell me because if they can't afford it, then buy in only 50 right ! Isn't tat stupid ? Then they just had to work for 3 days tat month and close shop as they sell out all the COE,and had to wait till the next COE bidding day !!! "

My question to you: - can the COE system of a monthly fixed quantity of 5000 certificates be sufficient for a monthly demand of 10,000 buyers through 300 car dealerships (all numbers are ASSUMPTIONS similar to your hypothetical numbers) ?

With the present COE system, the Buyers have to DEPEND on the DEALERSHIP to place the correct Question COE price, and the Government is aided by a supposedly INDEPENDENT Public Auditing Company to ensure the confidentiality of the COE process. There is little or no transparency as to which fools have placed the bids at such high prices of $50,000 PLUS (as had happened before) .

If a Dealership sell 700, and they will order 800 cars in a SUPPLY SIDE quota system, then they will run the risk of having to pay IMMEDIATELY the cost of the quota for the ADDITIONAL 100 cars to be brought into stock over and above the 700 that they would normally sell per month.

Will any Dealership risk doing so, when the quota price may be available lower in the next bidding exercise in a SUPPLY SIDE quota system ?

If they can afford it, I did not say that a Dealership need to buy only 50 cars, instead of buying 800 cars, when they can sell 700 cars (if I get the drift of your confused position correctly) .

In my SUPPLY SIDE quota system, the OBJECTIVE is to control the growth of the car population, as the Government has indicated the objective to be for its "Normal" COE system.

So whether if it is in a DEMAND SIDE (Normal COE quota system) - or SUPPLY SIDE (your Cheaper COE quota system) is being followed, any Dealership will just have to wait till the next month when all the cars (or COE) are sold out according to what are the number of cars allotted to be sold in either systems for a given period.

So what is your problem in accepting either one of the systems that serves the OBJECTIVE of controlling the GROWTH of the VEHICLE POPULATION ? Do you prefer the NORMAL COE and reject the CHEAPER COE version (SUPPLY SIDE quota system) ?
[quote]
All your stupid crap just keep rotating about tis big [b]assumption tat u have. The demand will be lesser than the supply set by quota. Can u 100% say tat it will always happen ? Wat fiance sort of crap is just plain crap as wat I have explained earlier, they fixed the number of COE bought by their sale volume. If quota cannot fulfil the demand of bidders, which it highly likely will, then wat is your solution ? Please don't come up with answer such as "it won't happened lah because bla bla bla". Lets say it happened already, wat r u going to do ? Answer it to the point ! How does Gov do its selection ! [/b]If you can set aside trying to be smart while being stupid, and try to be objective then perhaps you will understand that all proposal will have to follow certain assumptions, until the reality of any situation prove such assumptions in a proposal to be right or wrong.

Nowhere did I write in my SUPPLY SIDE quota control system that DEMAND will be LESSER than SUPPLY.

How on earth did you read this into my post ?

Read again the purpose of the DEMAND SIDE quota control through the COE system, or the SUPPLY SIDE quota control system they both are meant to CONTROL the GROWTH of the VEHICLE POPULATION.

Atobe SG

In the end, if without using the ballot box, the quota sent to Gov will still rise due to high demand, and in the end they will charge a high price to dealer and in the end they will pass the cost to the consumer. Wat u have done is just add another link to the chain, another rung of ladder for the consumer. U in fact just increase the complications and the coffers of the dealer. Tis will make other poeple invest in COE too, which they will push up the price,increasing the demand of COE. Gov will have to raise the price again since demand is greater now. Wat have your stupid idea come to ? Higher COE !

U better read point 2 again. If I need to buy in more quota lot, I will not just use my name but my relatives', employees' name, my spouse name to buy ownership too. Then won't it forfeit your [b]stupid idea of charging more for additional lots u buy ? [/b]

Your statement that In the end, if without using the ballot box, the quota sent to Gov will still rise due to high demand, and in the end they will charge a high price to dealer, and in the end they will pass the cost to the customer.

You have described the very OBJECTIVE that the SUPPLY SIDE quota control system is trying to ACHIEVE - that is to PREVENT HIGH COST, as stated in your remark about "CHEAPER VERSION OF COE".

The present COE system is a ballot box system. The quota sent (not sure who will sent this as said by you) to the Government is already increasing with each COE tender exercise and is NOT MEETING the OBJECTIVE of the COE (or DEMAND SIDE) vehicle population control.

The dealer is pushing the COE price higher, as they try to grab any COE available ON BEHALF of the Car Buyer (your customer), as it is the Car Buyer who will pay for the COE when the bid is successful. So I am not sure how you get the idea that the Dealership is passing the COE cost to the customer (?) since the Car Buyer is already being forced by a COE system to pay UP FRONT for the COE price.

If you can remove your prejudiced thinking and stop trying to kill the SUPPLY SIDE proposal WITHOUT FULLY UNDERSTANDING the various statements made, then you will see that there is NO ADDITIONAL RUNG OF LADDER FOR THE CONSUMER .

In the SUPPLY SIDE quota system, the DEALER is responsible to pay for the PRICE of the quota lot that he is interested in, with a MINIMUM PRICE fixed by the Government at $5000 PER CAR as suggested in my post.

Compared to a DEMAND SIDE quota system as in the PRESENT COE SYSTEM, the DEALER will NORMALLY assist the Car Buyer to bid for a COE that is PAID BY THE CUSTOMER, at a COE PRICE LEVEL that is ARBITRALIY DETERMINED with NO TRANSPARENCY.

Where is the ADDITIONAL RUNG in the LADDER with the SUPPLY SIDE quota system, when the DEALER is made responsible to PAY for the PRICE that is tendered according to his preferred Quota Lot Size ?

In the present COE system, do you think that the Dealers are NOT using their employees names, relatives, spouses name to buy COE too, and creating a COE resale market as had happened ?

If this practice has been removed, the same measures can also be implemented in a SUPPLY SIDE quota system to prevent similar abuses. So what is your problem to accept a SUPPLY SIDE quota system that allow a "CHEAPER COE PRICE" than a NORMAL COE price paid PER CAR for the Car Owner ?

About your comment on my stupid fixed quota size, please refer to my post on Page 1 of this thread, dated 10 October 2003 02:54AM, it was clearly printed as follows:

The difference between the SUPPLY side quota control and the DEMAND side COE quota control is that a Dealership will have to commit not to the payment of ONE vehicle, but for the entire quota of a fixed quantity of vehicles - either 500, 1000, [color=red]or any numbers lower or higher [/color].

Again, on Page 1, 10 October 2003 11:24 AM, the following statement was again made in my post:

" If 5000 vehicles can only benefit 5000 BUYERS only, does it really matter if this 5000 vehicles (divided into whatever smaller lots) benefit whatever numbers of dealership ?

Someone has to loose out on the opportunity to buy a car, so does it matter if some dealership sell more, or sell nothing at all ?

[color=red]If fairness is to be done, then divide into smaller quota lots of 25 or 50 vehicles per quota permit, so as to allow more dealership to have its share.[/color] "

Are you satisfied that the SUPPLY SIDE quota system DOES NOT NECESSARILY have to be in lots of 300, 500, 1000, 2000, 5000 it depends on what and how the final solution is convenient to be acceptable to the Dealerships and to the Vehicle Buyers.

Atobe SG

Another argument against your stupid fixed quota size. If a brand mitsubishi sell 700 cars a month, and he deicded to buy only 500 COE because they will be "overcharged" from your great idea previously, while BMW sell 300 a month and force to buy 500 COE as there aren't any other smaller denominators suggested by u again. Suppose I wanted to buy a mitsubish. But in the end I was turned down as it has ran out of COE, I will be forced to buy BMW tat month isn't it ? Does your fixed quota make any sense then ?? If I am importing Porche, importing a or 2 car per month, how much lots should I buy then ?

Surely now, if you can afford to buy a BMW, why even consider a Mitsubishi in the first place ? If you can only afford to buy a Mitsubishi, I am not sure if you have enough budget even to be forced to buy a BMW.

If one has to be stupid, it does not take too much smart effort to do so in trying to be a Car Dealer and wondering the quota lot size to bid for when importing any make of car.

Obviously, you are not an entrepreneur who can overcome the challenges of a new idea ?

Read point 5 carefully again,

Why will dealer ever choose balloting when he can go for aunctioning tat will give him more profit ? They r profit orientated isn't it ? Business is meant to make money, they r not here doing charity. Only can Gov to do such things direct to car owners,as wat I have suggested previously.

When a Dealer is successful in getting the quota lot size in a SUPPLY SIDE quota system, he can dispose of the available cars to be sold in any manner the Dealership wish.

Nowhere did I suggest that the Dealership must only resort to balloting, as I had indicated that it is only GOOD PUBLIC RELATIONS that the Dealership does so to overcome the greater number of buyers against the limited quota of cars available to be sold

Again, you have allowed stupidity to get in the way of being smart since the Car Dealership is only interested in selling his stock of cars, and not exactly trying to squeeze every available dollar from the Car Buyer through a wild auction system. How will you react to such a Car Dealership, if you have the budget to be a Car Buyer ?

U really underestimate the potential of dealing with COE. Singapore definitely will have people buying cars right ? And the demand will be much greater than the quota given by Gov. The real price will definitely be higher than the "proposed" lower price u want the gov to set. The demand for COE will be the push factor for maintaining the price. Paying upright may be very difficult to u, but there r tons of rich guys around in Singapore using money to buy property, shares and etc. If your only deterent is just having a large capital, then I have to say it won't work. If the return is high, no matter how much the price is, people will invest in it. In the case u r really stupid, there r people investing hundreds of thousands to a mere business plan just to have the hope of getting back the money in a matter of many years, and the risk of losing it all is very great. I don't see why they will not buy the relatively safer COE for investment instead. If Gov quota is 5000, and each cost $1000, I think it is easy to monopolise the market using the many relatives' IC approach, needing only just $5 million dollars in capital. U again think tat is huge ? Then u really have to start work in a fiance company boy.

If there are tons of rich guys around in Singapore using money to buy property, shares, and etc. then the property market will not be so gloomy, the stock exchange index would have surged with high volume turnover, and the basic economic outlook will not be as gloomy as it is today in Singapore. So where are your rich guys ?

Are ownership of COE transferable ? Can one actually bid for a COE and resell it at a higher price ?

Why is the COE not open and transparent to u ? The price is really paid by how much they bid, and the expected price is shown on the net everyday. Wat part is invinsible to u ? R u going to ask from Gov for something not practical again ?

If you think that the COE system is transparent then you truly live up to your credo and there is nothing more that need to be explained to try to help you to turn around.

For the benefit of the others, who have been following our series of exchanges, perhaps they will agree that it will be more transparent if the names of those putting up the bids are also displayed. If you believe in the auction system, which is a LIVE EVENT, then the COE system should be as LIVE as can be possible, so as to ensure that realistic bids are put by REAL PEOPLE, and not ghosts.

The idea is not about how the Gov spend tax money, it is about if Gov should use tis method to gather tax money. Do u think tis is a bad way of taxing ?

U feel tat the money is not well spent by Gov when it collect COE as tax. U think u will do a better job ? From your stupid suggestion for COE, I can see how good your problem solving ability is. Your suggestion has no value added in it, creating more problems and u refuse to face tat point. Go back, read my 7 points again and reply instead of re-telling everyone wat your idea is all about again. Please answer my first point. This is third time I ask u to reply tat question.

Frankly I can not even see a single advantage nor any feasibility compared to the old COE method. Too much loop holes and not well thought, I think u better start from formula again.

Taxing is one thing, but milking the Citizens is another thing.

If you prefer the Government to milk us in every possible way, as what the Government is doing to Singaporeans by cornering every types of services that Singaporeans need daily, and through every single transaction performed via GST, ERP, HDB and URA car parks in every and any available space for every minute of the day and night.

The COE system was originally set out to CONTROL the GROWTH of the vehicle population in Singapore, and as stated, it has become so lucrative, that the original objective seems to have been lost; and the Government is now increasing the COE quota every month.

Perhaps in living up to your credo, you have lost sight of this event, and assume that the Government is looking after you (with the issuing of Singapore Shares, HDB Upgrading Programs and other bribes that you end up paying for ) , while taking more out of your pocket on a daily basis without you even feeling the pinch until it hurts.

Maybe there is some truth in your being stupid-is-smart so as to be able to accept these Government milking actions in a justifiably positive manner, and forget the original declared objective made with the COE system. Sleep soundly in the arms of the Government and let it milk you while you go into deep slumber.

stupidissmart SG

Again and again I have ask u toreply to the situation when there r more bidders than the quota set by Gov. Instead of answering tat u still keep telling me tat it won't happened. Do u know anything about warehouse management ? A company will not keep its inventory of raw material exact to the number of product they sold. They will keep a SURPLUS of it so that they can rush through sudden orders and etc. Hence if I sold 700 cars at the month before, I will not buy in 700 exact but will buy in 800. Why ? Wat if the cars r sold out at the 3rd week ? Wat if there is a boom in the car been sold tat month ? I will again have to close my shop till the end of the month again is it ? No one know how much product they can sell within a month. If tat is the case, wat is going to prevent over bidding from Gov ?

And further more, they can surely sell out all the COE they obtained easily. If they don't, they just keep it till next month and sell it off. Do u think they will have to consider so much as wat u described ? THe sum of money u describe is little. As I have said, if u have $5 million, u have monopolise the car industry for tat month. U can sell it off for $10000 each, which will give u a handsome profit of $50 million in return. Will buyer still pay for tat amount ?? Of course they will, since it is lower than the $50000 COE we pay now. And here u go again describing tat won't happen tat won't happen.

""
The present COE system is a ballot box system. The quota sent(not sure who will sent this as said by you) to the Government is already increasing with each COE tender exercise ?and is NOT MEETING the OBJECTIVE of the COE (or DEMAND SIDE) vehicle population control.

The dealer is pushing the COE price higher, as they try to grab any COE available ON BEHALF of the Car Buyer (your customer), as it is the Car Buyer who will pay for the COE when the bid is successful. So I am not sure how you get the idea that the Dealership is passing the COE cost to the customer (?) since the Car Buyer is already being forced by a COE system to pay UP FRONT for the COE price.
""

R u updated at all ? Have they use ballot boxes at all ? Do I have to involve dealers in bidding COE ? Is there any general knowledge left in your brain ? Presently if I want to bid for COE,I will do it myself through tis website.

http://www.onemotoring.com.sg/vehBuy/buy_bcoe.asp
http://www.onemotoring.com.sg/faq/faqIndex.asp?CatID=80#7

U can update yourself reading through tis website about the openness of COE system and tat bidding for COE. NOW car owners do not require any help from DEALER at all in bidding for COE. They get to bid themselves. Who actually go through a car agent to buy a COE now ??? I wanted a car, I buy the COE direct from Gov, then after obtaining the cert I go over to the car dealers and select my car. TAT IS ALL ! Why go to a dealer and ask them to bid for me ? If u r lazy and stupid, asking dealer to bid for u, don't blame gov but blame yourself as the dealer not the one paying the COE in the end, the dealer just want u to get the COE in the end.

PRESENT: Gov -> Buyer

STUPID IDEA : Gov -> Dealer -> Buyer

Isn't tat adding another rung of ladder to the red tape, the complication and the problems with your "smart" idea ? And u acknowledge tat dealer will make a profit from trading in COE, u just add COST to the buyer in COE now.

Seems u know the trend of using other peopel IC, how is your overcharging policy going to work then ?

If in the end if the lowest denomination is 20, then I just gather 20 people to buy the COE, which is very easy. Wat difference will it make to the present COE system where the owner bid their own COE ? Won't tat cause over bidding to the Gov again ?

"""
Surely now, if you can afford to buy a BMW, why even consider a Mitsubishi in the first place ? If you can only afford to buy a Mitsubishi, I am not sure if you have enough budget even to be forced to buy a BMW.
"""

Tat is a stupid remark from u again. I am trying to say I want to have a car A, but it ran out of COE tat month. So how if I need a car tis month ?? I am forced to buy B which I don't really like due to the implementation of your stupid suggestion. Is tat good to general population ?

"""
Nowhere did I suggest that the Dealership must only resort to balloting, as I had indicated that it is only GOOD PUBLIC RELATIONS that the Dealership does so to overcome the greater number of buyers against the limited quota of cars available to be sold
""

Good, at least u realise u just create another social problem to society. U r not car dealer, u won't know how they react. People r more resourceful and smarter than u think. And the dealer, probably everyone, will want to squeeze watever money they can made when opportunity arise.

If stock exchange is gloomy, tat doesn't mean there aren't rich guy around. For the rich, they have tis mentality. Why will I want to invest my money on tis investment ? Wat is the return for me if I invest tis money ? They don't go around wasting money to buy any stocks, any property they want. They r waiting for opportunity. If u just anyhow whack at the stock in singapore, u will find tat your riches will be wasted. Wake up !! If the stock market is gloomy, it doesn't mean there is no rich people around. If the streets of a country is dirty, does tat mean ALL the people there r dirty people ? If the streets r all clean, does the people of tat country deemed as clean and tidy ?

Another of your stupid remark. Why will u want to publish out the name of the bidders for all to see ? If I bid for a car, and I bid at a high amount, why will I want other peoople to see I am the one bidding for it ? To me tis is my personal privacy. When the bid is over, there will be people claiming the COE isn't it ?? Using auction ? Why downgrade to a lower system when we have a more superior system on line now ? THERE R 5000 COE to fill up ! Do u expect people to sit there for 3 days 3 nights to finish auctioning for it all ?? There may be 50000 people trying to buy COE. U want it to held at national stadium ? WILL THE PRICE BE FAIR ?? The initially price may be very different than the price of the last COE sold.

As I say, I am asking if u think tis a bad way of taxing. I am not asking how Gov is spending the tax money. However your idea of the supply system has fail miserably. So u got any smart ideas to replace it ?

Your attack seems groundless as u keep feeling your idea is good. I have asked for four times now. If there is an overbidding from Gov quota, wat is gov going to do ? They raise the bidding price, go to ballot box or wat ?

Atobe SG

Do you read what your eyes see ? The following was printed to address your problem in understanding what was previously written:

My question to you: - can the COE system of a monthly fixed quantity of [color=red]5000 certificates be sufficient for a monthly demand of 10,000 buyers through 300 car dealerships (all numbers are ASSUMPTIONS similar to your hypothetical numbers) ?[/color]

Did the words "it won't happen" appear anywhere in my text ?

Do u know anything about warehouse management ? A company will not keep its inventory of raw material exact to the number of product they sold. They will keep a [b]SURPLUS of it so that they can rush through sudden orders and etc. Hence if I sold 700 cars at the month before, I will not buy in 700 exact but will buy in 800. Why ? Wat if the cars r sold out at the 3rd week ? Wat if there is a boom in the car been sold tat month ? I will again have to close my shop till the end of the month again is it ? No one know how much product they can sell within a month. If tat is the case, wat is going to prevent over bidding from Gov ? [/b]

Obviously, being a warehouse expert you are not exactly a financial wizard to appreciate the cost of holding surplus stocks.

Firstly, do you understand the whole purpose of CONTROLLING the GROWTH of the VEHICLE POPULATION in Singapore - either with the COE (DEMAND SIDE Quota) or SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your understanding it as being "CHEAPER COE") ?

The ORIGINAL idea of COE was to CONTROL THE GROWTH of the car population - NOT TO COLLECT REVENUE for the Government; and certainly not for the benefit of the CAR DEALERSHIPs or the BUYERS

And further more, they can surely sell out all the COE they obtained easily. If they don't, they just keep it till next month and sell it off. Do u think they will have to consider so much as wat u described ?

Did you read exactly what was posted previously ?

To prevent any SINGLE Dealership in taking control of all available quota, the SUPPLY SIDE Quota System can be 'FINE TUNED' to ensure that it does not happen.

My proposal was to make it more expensive - by leaps of 20 percent - for every subsequent quota awarded to a successful bid by any single Dealership.

It will make the cost of UNSOLD cars to be kept in stock.

THe sum of money u describe is little. As I have said, if u have $5 million, u have monopolise the car industry for tat month. U can sell it off for $10000 each, which will give u a handsome profit of $50 million in return. Will buyer still pay for tat amount ?? Of course they will, since it is lower than the $50000 COE we pay now. And here u go again describing tat won't happen tat won't happen.

Sure the Car Owners can pay whatever amount that the Dealers are willing to charge if the head instincts have shown, but do not forget that whether it is a COE (DEMAND SIDE Quota) or SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your "Cheaper COE) will have a limit in the quantity of cars to be sold.

What is your concern here ? All the quota falling into the hands of one dealership, or Cheaper COE with a SUPPLY SIDE Quota system, or loss in Revenue for the Government ?

""
The present COE system is a ballot box system. The quota sent(not sure who will sent this as said by you) to the Government is already increasing with each COE tender exercise ?and is NOT MEETING the OBJECTIVE of the COE (or DEMAND SIDE) vehicle population control.

The dealer is pushing the COE price higher, as they try to grab any COE available ON BEHALF of the Car Buyer (your customer), as it is the Car Buyer who will pay for the COE when the bid is successful. So I am not sure how you get the idea that the Dealership is passing the COE cost to the customer (?) since the Car Buyer is already being forced by a COE system to pay UP FRONT for the COE price.
""

R u updated at all ? Have they use ballot boxes at all ? Do I have to involve dealers in bidding COE ? Is there any general knowledge left in your brain ? Presently if I want to bid for COE,I will do it myself through tis website.

http://www.onemotoring.com.sg/vehBuy/buy_bcoe.asp
http://www.onemotoring.com.sg/faq/faqIndex.asp?CatID=80#7

U can update yourself reading through tis website about the openness of COE system and tat bidding for COE. NOW car owners do not require any help from DEALER at all in bidding for COE. They get to bid themselves. Who actually go through a car agent to buy a COE now ??? I wanted a car, I buy the COE direct from Gov, then after obtaining the cert I go over to the car dealers and select my car. TAT IS ALL ! Why go to a dealer and ask them to bid for me ? If u r lazy and stupid, asking dealer to bid for u, don't blame gov but blame yourself as the dealer not the one paying the COE in the end, the dealer just want u to get the COE in the end.

With such a system, is there transparency as to who has submitted an electronic bid ? Does your name appear at all ? Finally, with so many bidders to a limited number of the Present COE Quota, will there not be the primitive ballot box - whether using an actual box or electronic means ?

PRESENT: Gov -> Buyer

STUPID IDEA : Gov -> Dealer -> Buyer

Isn't tat adding another rung of ladder to the red tape, the complication and the problems with your "smart" idea ? And u acknowledge tat dealer will make a profit from trading in COE, u just add COST to the buyer in COE now.

Not quite correct in what you have indicated, and should be :-

PRESENT: Gov - > Buyer / DEALER-Buyer "STUPID-is-SMART" IDEA: Gov -> Dealer

Buyer just pay for the car with the price of all the Dealer's cost indicated, including the quota price paid for with the SUPPLY SIDE Quota control. (This option can be FINE TUNED).

Seems u know the trend of using other peopel IC, how is your overcharging policy going to work then ?

If in the end if the lowest denomination is 20, then I just gather 20 people to buy the COE, which is very easy. Wat difference will it make to the present COE system where the owner bid their own COE ? Won't tat cause over bidding to the Gov again ?

The idea of NORMAL COE (DEMAND SIDE Quota) or SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your preferred term of CHEAPER COE) is to control the Growth of the Car Population.

So black cat or white car, what is the difference ? The same cat catches the mouse.

The only problem is that with one cat (the NORMAL COE) there is no transparency since no one knows if the bid price is a "ghost" bidder.

"""
Surely now, if you can afford to buy a BMW, why even consider a Mitsubishi in the first place ? If you can only afford to buy a Mitsubishi, I am not sure if you have enough budget even to be forced to buy a BMW.
"""
Tat is a stupid remark from u again. I am trying to say I want to have a car A, but it ran out of COE tat month. So how if I need a car tis month ?? I am forced to buy B which I don't really like due to the implementation of your stupid suggestion. Is tat good to general population ?

My apologies for hurting your feelings with the sarcasm.

If Car A runs out of stock (whether due to lack of COE or physical car stock), and if you really like that car, surely you can wait ?

The waiting list of some of the most prestigeous car is almost a few months long, What is the big deal of a Mitsubishi or any other make ?

The problem with most Singaporean Car Owners is their ridiculous frenzied and desperate instinct to possess a car, even just to own a NEW car for once in a Life Time, and selling it after one or two years being unable to meet the instalments, or when COE price drop again. In the process, losing at least 20 Percent per year.

Atobe SG

Do you read what your eyes see ? The following was printed to address your problem in understanding what was previously written:

My question to you: - can the COE system of a monthly fixed quantity of [color=red]5000 certificates be sufficient for a monthly demand of 10,000 buyers through 300 car dealerships (all numbers are ASSUMPTIONS similar to your hypothetical numbers) ?[/color]

Have I printed anywhere in my post that there WILL NOT BE "more Bidders will be Lesser than the quota set by Gov" ?

Obviously, being a warehouse expert you are not exactly a financial wizard to appreciate the cost of holding surplus stocks.

Firstly, do you understand the whole purpose of CONTROLLING the GROWTH of the VEHICLE POPULATION in Singapore - either with the COE (DEMAND SIDE Quota) or SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your understanding it as being "CHEAPER COE" ) ?

The ORIGINAL idea of COE was to control the growth of the car population - NOT TO COLLECT REVENUE for the Government; and certainly not for the benefit of the CAR DEALERSHIPs.

Did you read exactly what was posted previously ?

To prevent any SINGLE Dealership in taking control of all available quota, the SUPPLY SIDE Quota System can be 'FINE TUNED' to ensure that it does not happen.

My proposal was to make it more expensive - by leaps of 20 percent - for every subsequent quota to a successful bid by any single Dealership.

It will make the cost of UNSOLD cars to be kept in stock to be EXPENSIVE to the Dealership so as to prevent overbidding.

Atobe SG

"""
Nowhere did I suggest that the Dealership must only resort to balloting, as I had indicated that it is only GOOD PUBLIC RELATIONS that the Dealership does so to overcome the greater number of buyers against the limited quota of cars available to be sold
""
Good, at least u realise u just create another social problem to society. U r not car dealer, u won't know how they react. People r more resourceful and smarter than u think. And the dealer, probably everyone, will want to squeeze watever money they can made when opportunity arise.

I am surprise that you think so highly of Car Dealers for their ability to be resourceful and smarter than anyone (perhaps even yourself); and at the same time you judge them dastardly low for trying to squeeze "watever money they can made when opportunity arise".

Are you sure you are reading what you want to see from my post ?

I did mention that if they so wish they can use any other method to dispose of their limited stock from a successful SUPPLY SIDE Quota Bid.

I also mentioned that for the sake of GOOD PUBLIC RELATIONS they MAY resort to BALLOTING - and this was made in reply to your question as to what the Dealership should do when their stock is less then the huge number of buyers wanting to buy their car.

If stock exchange is gloomy, tat doesn't mean there aren't rich guy around. For the rich, they have tis mentality. Why will I want to invest my money on tis investment ? Wat is the return for me if I invest tis money ? They don't go around wasting money to buy any stocks, any property they want. They r waiting for opportunity. If u just anyhow whack at the stock in singapore, u will find tat your riches will be wasted. Wake up !! If the stock market is gloomy, it doesn't mean there is no rich people around. If the streets of a country is dirty, does tat mean ALL the people there r dirty people ? If the streets r all clean, does the people of tat country deemed as clean and tidy ?

So your brilliance show up again ?

One who is rich can is smart enough to NOT "go around wasting money to buy any stocks, any property they want. They r waiting for opportunity", but stupid enough not to be able to wait for the arrival of new stock of COE or Cars, and allow oneself to be FORCED to switch to another alternative make of cars - (from Mitsubishi to BMW; or "M" to "B" ) ?

Another of your stupid remark. Why will u want to publish out the name of the bidders for all to see ? If I bid for a car, and I bid at a high amount, why will I want other peoople to see I am the one bidding for it ? To me tis is my personal privacy. When the bid is over, there will be people claiming the COE isn't it ?? Using auction ? Why downgrade to a lower system when we have a more superior system on line now ? THERE R 5000 COE to fill up ! Do u expect people to sit there for 3 days 3 nights to finish auctioning for it all ?? There may be 50000 people trying to buy COE. U want it to held at national stadium ? WILL THE PRICE BE FAIR ?? The initially price may be very different than the price of the last COE sold.

Without such a list of the names of Real Bidders for the present COE system, how do we know that the actual COE bid prices are made by the Government, or by "stupid" people who think themselves as being so "smart" ?

As I say, I am asking if u think tis a bad way of taxing. I am not asking how Gov is spending the tax money. However your idea of the supply system has fail miserably. So u got any smart ideas to replace it ?

I am not sure in your brilliance of believing in your credo, you will actually qualify to make any sound judgment of any idea being smarter, as it will end up as being stupid with your inability to judge - since in your case "smart-is-stupid".

Your attack seems groundless as u keep feeling your idea is good.

Why do you feel for me that my idea is good, when I have mentioned at least twice over the last 24 hours that my solution may not be the FINAL SOLUTION, and require further fine tuning.

I have asked for four times now. If there is an overbidding from Gov quota, wat is gov going to do ? They raise the bidding price, go to ballot box or wat ?

The problem with a credo that "stupid-is-smart" is that it will lead one to think that one is smarter by being brilliantly stupid.

Your question begs the answer from a Singapore Government that is so money faced that when there is overbidding for (not from) Government Quota, it will simply increase the quota allotment (as in the present COE system) so that more desparate Singapore Car Owners will pay more for the government controlled supply of "limited" COE.

My proposal for a SUPPLY SIDE Quota System with a fixed price - (at the lower end of a PROPOSED $5000) - per car in EACH Quota Lot, and make the DEALERS pay UPFRONT for the entire quota, is to achieve the ORIGINAL OBJECTIVE of the present COE, but WITHOUT the ridiculous speculative frenzy of COE bid prices - that are NOT TRANSPARENT to begin with.

Your term to my SUPPLY SIDE Quota System as a "CHEAPER COE" System already recognise the fact that it is CHEAPER than the original COE.

From your posting, it seems that you have a quarrel with my idea, in the manner that the buyers will get access to the cars, and the possibility of any SINGLE Dealer grabbing all the SUPPLY SIDE Quota in one or every tender exercise.

It is interesting that you have conveniently side stepped several issues that I have replied to you in my last Point-by-Point response, and have not brought up those matters.

Hopefully, I have done the same with this response.

stupidissmart SG

''
My question to you: - can the COE system of a monthly fixed quantity of 5000 certificates be sufficient for a monthly demand of 10,000 buyers through 300 car dealerships ?(all numbers are ASSUMPTIONS similar to your hypothetical numbers) ?
''

Is tat even considered as a reply to my question ?? Don't u get it ! We can't change the number of certificate to be given to public. Don't tell me if there are 1 million bidders for 500 certificate tat month, then the Gov has to release 1 million certificate ! No ! The number given to public has to be control as SIngapore is small ! The number is set by factors such as expiry of old cars and the expanding of the roads ! INSTANTLY CHANGING THE QUOTA IS NOT AN OPTION ! Isn't tat wat GOv is doing now, gradually increasing the number of vehicles released to the public per month. Wat I am asking is if there is an over demand from GOV side, then wat is your selection proces !!

''
Obviously, being a warehouse expert you are not exactly a financial wizard to appreciate the cost of holding surplus stocks.

Firstly, do you understand the whole purpose of CONTROLLING the GROWTH of the VEHICLE POPULATION in Singapore - either with the COE (DEMAND SIDE Quota) or SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your understanding it as being "CHEAPER COE" ) ?

The ORIGINAL idea of COE was to control the growth of the car population - NOT TO COLLECT REVENUE for the Government; and certainly not for the benefit of the CAR DEALERSHIPs.
""

Wat does the above point mean ? Why repeat telling me the same point again ? I ask u then, if I sell 713 cars tis month, how much will u propose to bid for next month COE ?

""
My proposal was to make it more expensive - by leaps of 20 percent - for every subsequent quota to a successful bid by any single Dealership.

""

U haven't try to even read from my mail at all is it ??? Ti sis from my earlier mail

""
I can use my spouse's, parent's IC to bid to avoid the issue of being charged more for extra bidding isn't it ? If u need a car dealership license, I will register a car dealership business with my spouse's name and again use it to buy ownership.
""

In tat case, I will not be OVERCHARGED at ALL ! If I need 1000, and gov start overcharging for number greater than 500. Wat will I do ? I will buy in 500 and ask my wife to buy in another 500. How will I be overcharged ? U cannot fine tuned tat idea anymore, it have to be overhaul !

""
What is your concern here ? All the quota falling into the hands of one dealership, or Cheaper COE with a SUPPLY SIDE Quota system, or loss in Revenue for the Government ? Be specifically clear.

""

I am concern tat COE doesn't get any cheaper for potential owners, and the original profit from COE is being taken by business man ! Then wat is the use of your idea ? U prefer a business man to earn the profit or Gov to take the profit !

""
PRESENT: Gov - > Buyer / DEALER-Buyer "STUPID-is-SMART" IDEA: Gov -> Dealer

Buyer just pay for the car with the price of all the Dealer's cost indicated, including the quota price paid for with the SUPPLY SIDE Quota control. (This option can be FINE TUNED).
""

Tis is incredible ! Who r u trying to cheat ? Do u have any idea wat u had said ? But just from your above chain, dealer has to drive all the cars themselves ! Wat is the difference from just repackaging ? If I buy coffee and sugar and sell them together, tat doesn't mean the supply chain start with me ! For just coffe, the chain start from

farmer -> company -> exporter -> distributer -> shophouses -> consumer

NOT

shop houses -> consumer

if I just sell both coffee and sugar together as a package, tat doesn't mean my roots doesn't start from farmer !!
For your stupid idea, and for your stupid sense, after dealer, the chain must continue to the buyer ! Hence

Gov -> Dealer -> buyer

U better read tis paragraph again

""
If dealer really buy in $10000 per COE from the gov tat month, we will expect them to sell at $15000 isn't it ? Can u blame them ? They r taking risks in buying COEs isn't it, thus should expect a profit as they may iccur a lose too.
""

And for the cars,they will charge for profit too. If we consider COE only, buyer has to pay additional fees if we just deal with COE only !

""
The idea of NORMAL COE (DEMAND SIDE Quota) or SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your preferred term of CHEAPER COE) is to control the Growth of the Car Population.

So black cat or white car, what is the difference ? The same cat catches the mouse. ""

Tat is better to describe your idea bah. If there r 50000 people bidding for 5000 COE, the GOV will give the cert to highest bidder again,and the price of COE will remain relatively the SAME, if not, your stupid idea will charge car owners higher ! U fail to answer wat is GOV SELECTION PROCESS if there is an over bidding ! Whether gov sell directly to people or to dealer, they still must pay the high COE ! Wat difference had u made !

They can wait, true. But tat is an added DISADVANTAGE of your idea ! I don't have to wait but due to tis idea, I must wait longer !

Yes,they can resort to bidding. But they can ALSO resort to auction. The cost has become higher AGAIN ! People can go for 50000 per car, if they go for auction, the price will still fetch 50000 per car. Tis time dealer get all tat money instead. Wat merit has your idea have then ?

I am saying they r waiting for opportunity. If COE start to sell by your idea, tat opportunity arrived and they will use it to buy COE in big stock. I am NOT SAYING THEY R WAITING FOR YOUR STUPID IDEA TO BE REALISED ! I am saying there r people with money to invest. CK tang is 357 million ++, a normal bungalow 1.5 million ++. Is 5 million TAT MUCH ??

''
Without such a list of the names of Real Bidders for the present COE system, how do we know that the actual COE bid prices are made by the Government, or by "stupid" people who think themselves as being so "smart" ?

""
If they want to cheat, they can still put in bogus name there and u still don't know if such person exists. U think putting name work at all ?? Why do u think Gov will resort to STUPID things as wat u had described ? If so, then COE will have accidents like been sold for $ 50 !

""
Why do you feel for me that my idea is good, when I have mentioned at least twice over the last 24 hours that my solution may not be the FINAL SOLUTION, and require further fine tuning.

""

The groundwork is not even set by u for your idea ? The whole idea doesn't work at all ! It just made things worse !

""
My proposal for a SUPPLY SIDE Quota System with a fixed price - (at the lower end of a PROPOSED $5000) - per car in EACH Quota Lot, and make the DEALERS pay UPFRONT for the entire quota, is to achieve the ORIGINAL OBJECTIVE of the present COE, but WITHOUT the ridiculous speculative frenzy of COE bid prices - that are NOT TRANSPARENT to begin with.

Your term to my SUPPLY SIDE Quota System as a "CHEAPER COE" System already recognise the fact that it is CHEAPER than the original COE.
""

HAHAHAHAHA !! I say it is cheaper as I cannot find any other term to differentiate between the COE now and the COE of your stupid idea. Okie, I will differentiate it now by wat I feel about your idea. I will use "stupid COE". Now u happy ?? Laughing

And your objective has never been reached at all ! I ask again, if there is an over bidding, wat will be GOV selection process ?? Tell me straight !

Okie, just consider me dumb and list down in number your "several issues" tat u want me to "step into" so much. If it is something about how Gov spend its tax money, then save it for yourself. I am neutral about the Gov now

As a point, i will ask again.

Atobe SG

It is amazing how you twist and turn on this subject of 50,000 bidders for 5000 COE, to ONE Million bidders for 500 certificates, and despite my having given you my reply, you insist that none has been given. You truly personify your credo of " stupid-is-smart " .

Page 1 09 October 2003 09:53 PM - stupidissmart
There will be obviously more demand for cars than the quota set by Gov, and they will end up giving the cars with the highest bidder again. If Gov decide to release 500 cars tis month but 50000 cars r being bidded, how is gov going to decide who get who win the bid, other than who bid a higher price again ?

Page 1 10 October 2003 10:45 AM - stupidissmart
I believe u have not answer the possibility of people bidding over the quota level. Who will have priority then ? If there r 10 people wanting to buy 1 car ownership from a car dealer, then who will be given priority as to who get the ownership ? I don't see why won't the dealer buy in as much ownership as possible, since the actual level of demand is tat high. I don't believe u can safely say tat it won't happened.

Page 1 10 October 2003 11:24 AM atobe
What is the objective of DEMAND side quota (COE), or SUPPLY side quota ?

If 5000 vehicles can only benefit 5000 BUYERS only, does it really matter if this 5000 vehicles (divided into whatever smaller lots) benefit whatever numbers of dealership ?

Someone has to loose out on the opportunity to buy a car, so does it matter if some dealership sell more, or sell nothing at all ?

If fairness is to be done, then divide into smaller quota lots of 25 or 50 vehicles per quota permit, so as to allow more dealership to have its share.

Page 1 10 October 2003 02:19 PM - stupidissmart
As I say, tat idea is stupid. I ask again, if 50000 bid and there is only 5000 for tis month quota, then how ? Who get to have the car ?

Page 2 11 October 04:34 AM atobe
If 50,000 people were to demand from a Dealership that has dared to only successfully bid for a quota allocation of 500 cars - in a SUPPLY side scheme - do you think it will be a good PR exercise for the Dealership to get around this difficulty by holding a balloting exercise to determine who will be the lucky 500 new owners ?

Page 2 11 October 2003 11:35 AM - stupidissmart
If 50000 bids from dealers for 5000 gov quota, who get to have the 5000 ownership ? Those who bid more or they have go to ballot box again This is a very crucial question, please answer it.

Page 2 11 Octobe 2003 06:25 PM - atobe
Did you even bother to read my earlier post before your reply ?

Did you not read about the balloting that the Dealer can exercise ? What is to stop the Dealership from taking on more then one quota lot ?

Page 2 11 October 2003 11:38 PM - stupidissmart
All your stupid crap just keep rotating about tis big assumption tat u have. The demand will be lesser than the supply set by quota. Can u 100% say tat it will always happen ?

Page 2 12 October 2003 07:41 AM atobe
If you can set aside trying to be smart while being stupid, and try to be objective then perhaps you will understand that all proposal will have to follow certain assumptions, until the reality of any situation prove such assumptions in a proposal to be right or wrong.

Nowhere did I write in my SUPPLY SIDE quota control system that DEMAND will be LESSER than SUPPLY.

How on earth did you read this into my post ?

Page 2 12 October 2003 02:15 PM - stupidissmart
Again and again I have ask u toreply to the situation when there r more bidders than the quota set by Gov. Instead of answering tat u still keep telling me tat it won't happened.

Page 2 12 October 2003 03:57 PM atobe
Do you read what your eyes see ? The following was printed to address your problem in understanding what was previously written:

My question to you: - can the COE system of a monthly fixed quantity of 5000 certificates be sufficient for a monthly demand of 10,000 buyers through 300 car dealerships (all numbers are ASSUMPTIONS similar to your hypothetical numbers) ?

Did the words "it won't happen" appear anywhere in my text ?

Now that you have read all my previous answers repeated here to the same repeated point - how do you think the present COE system will resolve the ONE Million buyers bidding for only 300 COE ?

The answer for the FINAL TIME remains the same, as what has been given repeatedly - that whether it is the PRESENT COE or the SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your CHEAPER COE), the OBJECTIVE remain the same - and that is for this month the COE or SUPPLY SIDE Quota available is only 300.

The other 999,700 Singaporeans will have to wait for the next round - and NO APPOLIGIES will be offered.

Do you have a problem with the effects of the Present COE ?

Unfortunately, the Government has missed out on the ORIGINAL OBJECTIVE of the Present COE system, by issuing more and more COE to take advantage of the high COE prices that Singaporeans are "stupid-is-NOT-so-Smart" paying, just to own a car of ten years.

''
Obviously, being a warehouse expert you are not exactly a financial wizard to appreciate the cost of holding surplus stocks.

Firstly, do you understand the whole purpose of CONTROLLING the GROWTH of the VEHICLE POPULATION in Singapore - either with the COE (DEMAND SIDE Quota) or SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your understanding it as being "CHEAPER COE" ) ?

The ORIGINAL idea of COE was to control the growth of the car population - NOT TO COLLECT REVENUE for the Government; and certainly not for the benefit of the CAR DEALERSHIPs.
""
Wat does the above point mean ? Why repeat telling me the same point again ? I ask u then, if I sell 713 cars tis month, how much will u propose to bid for next month COE ?

Must I also help you to understand that you are fit only as a wharehouse supervisor, and not as a Financial Planner. Must I also make some marketing strategies and planning so as to help you live up to your credo too ?

Do you think it is wise to change buiseness strategy to cope with an implementation of a SUPPLY SIDE Quota Control ?

Do you think it will be wise to take advance booking from all interested Vehicle Buyers, and then plan your requirements for which Quota Lot size to bid for in a SUPPLY SIDE Quota System ?

Do you make future plans based on gut feeling only, or based on real data collected ?

Atobe SG

""
My proposal was to make it more expensive - by leaps of 20 percent - for every subsequent quota to a successful bid by any single Dealership.
""
U haven't try to even read from my mail at all is it ??? Ti sis from my earlier mail
""
I can use my spouse's, parent's IC to bid to avoid the issue of being charged more for extra bidding isn't it ? If u need a car dealership license, I will register a car dealership business with my spouse's name and again use it to buy ownership.
""
In tat case, I will not be OVERCHARGED at ALL ! If I need 1000, and gov start overcharging for number greater than 500. Wat will I do ? I will buy in 500 and ask my wife to buy in another 500. How will I be overcharged ? U cannot fine tuned tat idea anymore, it have to be overhaul !

Are you so sure that you can beat a system when the Government is determined to do something worthwhile ?

So what if you can have a hundred relatives to register new companies, and spread the profit around to a hundred new companies, all bidding their individual quotas ?

If one company can do it, so can all the other dealership.

If each of the 100 dealership allow 100 relatives to register new companies, there will be 10,000 bidders for the same fixed 300 cars (or 300 Quota Lots - each lot of 300 cars) allowed to be imported or sold for a given month.

Whether it is in the Present COE or in my SUPPLY SIDE Quota system, there can be ONE Million bidders, but the COE or Quota allowed will remain the same.

So what is your problem with this ?

""
What is your concern here ? All the quota falling into the hands of one dealership, or Cheaper COE with a SUPPLY SIDE Quota system, or loss in Revenue for the Government ? Be specifically clear.
""
I am concern tat COE doesn't get any cheaper for potential owners, and the original profit from COE is being taken by business man ! Then wat is the use of your idea ? U prefer a business man to earn the profit or Gov to take the profit !

I am surprised that you can put up your kind of assumption based on some simple misgivings, and kick up such a big fuss for what ?

You are concerned that COE get cheaper for potential vehicle owners ? Why should you be concerned ? You should be happy that Singaporeans can own a car by paying CHEAPER COE !

" ... original Profit from COE is being taken by business man" - where is the profit element coming from ? The Dealership is already required to declare the OMV, ARF or PARF of the vehicle being sold to the Vehicle Owner. Do you think it is so difficult to get the Dealership to declare also the Quota Price for the type of vehicle being offered for the current month ?

""
PRESENT: Gov - > Buyer / DEALER-Buyer
"STUPID-is-SMART" IDEA: Gov -> Dealer

Buyer just pay for the car with the price of all the Dealer's cost indicated, including the quota price paid for with the SUPPLY SIDE Quota control. (This option can be FINE TUNED).
""
Tis is incredible ! Who r u trying to cheat ? Do u have any idea wat u had said ? But just from your above chain, dealer has to drive all the cars themselves ! Wat is the difference from just repackaging ? If I buy coffee and sugar and sell them together, tat doesn't mean the supply chain start with me ! For just coffe, the chain start from

farmer -> company -> exporter -> distributer -> shophouses -> consumer
NOT
shop houses -> consumer

if I just sell both coffee and sugar together as a package, tat doesn't mean my roots doesn't start from farmer !!
For your stupid idea, and for your stupid sense, after dealer, the chain must continue to the buyer ! Hence

Gov -> Dealer -> buyer

U better read tis paragraph again

You are certainly trying so hard to be smart while showing the stupendous brilliance of your effort.

Who do you think is driving the NEW IMPORTED VEHICLES from PSA to the Dealer Showrooms ? The Dealer or the Vehicle Owner ?

You are certainly quite agile in moving from one point of presenting your preferred manner of debate to another convenient way of trying to prove NOTHING.

Why did you not originally post your brilliant idea as follows ? -

Present:
raw materials->pressing plant->vehicle assembly factory->marketing->government->distributor->dealer->government->buyer

Why did you only present it as :-

PRESENT: Gov - > Buyer ( / DEALER-Buyer )

STUPID IDEA: Gov -> Dealer

In your original example given, you started with the Government issuing COE directly to the Buyer, which I also included the Dealer bidding on behalf of the Buyer.

Instead of my idea being indicated according to you as "STUPID IDEA" , I had modified it by showing the supposed "Stupid Idea" is actually "SMART" :

" STUPID-IS-SMART " IDEA : Government -> Dealer.

In this change, the DEALER get to be responsible for what the price of the Quota (or COE) being bid and paid to the Government.

There is no difference between both your examples in the NUMBER of Stages of Transaction, only the person responsible for the Price.

""
If dealer really buy in $10000 per COE from the gov tat month, we will expect them to sell at $15000 isn't it ? Can u blame them ? They r taking risks in buying COEs isn't it, thus should expect a profit as they may iccur a lose too.
""
And for the cars,they will charge for profit too. If we consider COE only, buyer has to pay additional fees if we just deal with COE only !
""
The idea of NORMAL COE (DEMAND SIDE Quota) or SUPPLY SIDE Quota (your preferred term of CHEAPER COE) is to control the Growth of the Car Population.

[b]So black cat or white car, what is the difference ? The same cat catches the mouse. ""

Tat is better to describe your idea bah. If there r 50000 people bidding for 5000 COE, the GOV will give the cert to highest bidder again,and the price of COE will remain relatively the SAME, if not, your stupid idea will charge car owners higher ! U fail to answer wat is GOV SELECTION PROCESS if there is an over bidding ! Whether gov sell directly to people or to dealer, they still must pay the high COE ! Wat difference had u made ! [/b]

It looks like that it is impossible to change your infatuation with the idea of paying for a HIGHER PRICE COE than to pay for a CHEAPER COE system in a SUPPLY SIDE Quota system.

Despite the fact that you prefer to call my SUPPLY SIDE Quota System as being a "CHEAPER COE" - you still prefer to pay a HIGHER COE. It only show your brilliance in living up to your credo of being stupid-is-smart.

There is nothing more that can be done to assist mental patients, who prefer to hurt themselves, except to incarcerate them in a safe room so that they do not hurt themselves or others.

You can lead a camel to the water, but you cannot force it to drink.

« Previous Page Next Page »