Will MDA fine SPH for misleading headline of latest BTO exercise?

[Confuseous]

We can see that Straits Times used the final ratio of 1.1 in the bottom right corner to conclude that there is “one applicant for each BTO flat”. But if we aggregate by considering each project and flat type individually, the actual percentage of unsuccessful applicants is 31%. So a more correct headline should be “One-third of applicants unsuccessful in BTO exercise”. Also, 27% of the flats remains unsold even as applicants face rejection. Doesn’t sound so rosy now, does it?

Of course, it is not HDB’s fault if applicants are choosy on location or willing to take a chance on locations that were over-subscribed. After all, it can’t keep building in more popular areas just to meet such demand, for where do you find the space? But we must be wary of the authorities or the press trying to paint a better picture than what flat-hunters are experiencing.

- http://www.voiddecker.com/2013/06/one-third-of-applicants-unsuccessful-in-bto-exercise/

 

[chootchiew]

The mthly BTO exercise for years has a hidden objective. Not sure are peasant aware of it. Each applicant pays $10 admin fee and get to select 1 town. If HDB is sincere about letting peasant gets it, choices should be given during the application. CB everyone pay $10 add up to how much liao. I rather use this $10 to buy 4D.

 

[Confuseous]

The BTO scheme is no more than a tacit admission of the the gahmen that they have no clue as to the projected requirements.
They do not know the market, even with the thousands of civil servants farting around. We are paying millions to ministers who
are mere order takers of the market's housing needs. No foresight, no planning. Not even when they know that they were going
to unleash millions of foreigners in our midst. They were not aware that with these people coming in, we would have needed
extra housing?

Marlboro Tan sure screwed the next generation big time.