Jay's market diary
Why I think someone have insider news on Budget 2019 and P2P lending for homes may not work
When I first heard about Budget 2019 P2P lending scheme for homes, initially I was intrigued, but then immediately thought of potentially mutiple issues that may arise from such schemes. But before I give it a serious thought, I saw the following news...
https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2018/11/04/pm-launches-fundmyhome-scheme-to-help-first-time-home-owners/.
...then it all makes sense.
This all seems to fit into the needs of certain individuals.
Nepotism at work
This is nepotism, cronyism or whatever you name it, at work. We all know someone (Let's name him/her Fox) has been a staunch Pakatan supporter but fitting our national budget to suits their needs? That is simply outrageous. How can Fox launch a scheme within two days after the Budget 2019 announcement? Just look at the website and you know that these did not happen overnight. Properties are already listed there, some are already funded. I can only speculate one scenario: Fox may have already knew Budget 2019 will announce such initiative beforehand. If I'm a betting man, I would even wager that it was Fox who planted this idea to MoF because the example mentioned in Budget 2019 looks exactly the same as the platform's model.
Unfair competition due to insider information
Before I go into the merits and demerits of property P2P lending scheme, the impact of Fox having such insider news and first mover advantage means any that P2P entrepreneur would now need to play catch up with Fox. Simply because they are at least 6 months or even few years behind. Before Budget 2019, Fox already has the concept, own company funding, property developer's projects and even banks as first financial contributors in place. Any competitors based on similar concept will have to start from scratch and will be left far behind. Moreover, the launching was attended by none other than the Prime Minister and Minister of Finance. All these insider information and implicit government endorsement creates an utterly unfair competitive landscape.
Home ownership should not be via shortcuts
For me, the concept itself is dangerous. Because any P2P lending scheme ultimately need to be sustained through returns and thus any products or service involved inevitably need to be packaged as a financial product. But a house is more than just a financial product as many see that as a basic necessity. It is a sensitive issue, especially among those who cannot afford a house.
Instead of addressing property affordability, or encouraging prudent spending and borrowing, many stakeholders are irresponsibly encouraging home ownership among those who cannot afford it. If you cannot own a house, save for it. If you are earning less than what everyone else does, work harder or spend less. If majority of the population are doing that and yet house prices remain out of reach, that simply means a property bubble is forming and due to correct.
Instead, now we hear of calls to extend the property loan tenure to maybe 40 years, or do away with the 10% down payment requirement, then now this P2P scheme. These are all shortcuts trying to circumvent the core issues. rather than facing the problems head on and address them.
Exploring the property P2P scheme
There may be other genuine property P2P scheme concept coming out and they might actually work. But now I will just focus on Fox's scheme and the potential issues. Let's look at the steps listed in the website.
1. Buyers select a house and pay 20%, contributors or investors pay for the remaining 80%. The 20% instead of paying the developer, will be set aside in a trust account.
2. During the 5 year period, buyers don't have to pay any monthly mortgage repayment. Investors get guaranteed 5% per annum return funded from the money in the trust account.
3. By the 5th year, buyer need to choose whether to get a proper mortgage and buy it from the investor or sell it. Any capital appreciation up to 20% will go to developer first to compensate for their 20% effective discount initially. Anything above 20% will be shared among buyer and investor. Unfortunately, it any depreciation, buyer will bear the first 20% before it hit investor.
Questions that need to be answered
1. If the buyer can afford a 20% down payment, why can't he afford a proper mortgage? If many people complain that they couldn't accumulate enough money for 10% down payment, how does this scheme help these genuine buyers?
2. Why does developer still get to share the potential upside when the property is sold? I know they gave the 20% discount in the first place, but many projects currently are offering rebates of more than 20% and developers don't get to "recoup" the discounts given
3. At the 5th year, buyer still need to face reality and get a proper property mortgage? So if the buyer still cannot afford the house, then effectively they will be evicted?
P2P lending is just another glorified rent-to-own (RTO) scheme to help developers sell properties
By now, if you haven't realised, this so called P2P scheme is just another glorified rent-to-own (RTO) scheme. Let's look at the effect on the players involved with an example. Let's assume a simple property worth RM200,000.
Proper mortgage financing
1) Buyers need to fork out RM20k as down payment to developer and get a mortage of RM180k
2) Banks will pay developer the remaining RM180k and keep the house title as security.
3) Buyer will pay roughly RM800-900 per month based on 30-35 years repayment period
4) The capital appreciation or depreciation will be borne by the buyer and the buyer gets to choose whether to sell the property
RTO scheme (based on Maybank HouzKey concept)
1) Banks will pay developer RM200k and own the house
2) Buyers don't need to pay any down payment but pay a rental, which is slighly higher than mortgage (roughly RM900-1,100) as no down payment was made
3) Buyers can switch to a proper mortgage halfway (with the previous rental paid taken into account)
4) Buyers do not yet own the house so do not share the capital appreciation or depreciation but can choose to rent up till 30 years
P2P (based on Fund My Home)
1) Buyers will pay RM40k to developer which be put in a trust account
2) Investors will pay developer RM160k
3) Investors will get guaranteed 5% per annum return on RM160k (RM160k x 5%=RM8k per year for 5 years, funded by the trust account)
4) By 5th year, buyers have to switch to a proper mortgage and buy over the investors' portion of RM160k at market rate, failure to do so means the property will be sold.
If the property is worth RM250k, or a 25% appreciation, developer will get the first bite of RM40k. So effectively developer recoup the discount given in the first place and manage to sell the property for RM160k (1st year)+RM40k (5th year). Investors will get the RM160k (capital)+RM8k (capital appreciation 80% x RM250k-RM200k-RM40k)+RM40k (guaranteed return for 5 years). Buyer will get RM40k (capital) +RM2k (20% x RM250k-Rm200k-RM40k)
If the property is worth RM200k only, or zero appreciation, developer still get to sell the property in the 1st year for RM160k, investor will get RM160k (capital)+zero capital appreciation+RM40k (guaranteed return for 5 years). Buyers will get RM40k (capital) +zero capital appreciation
If the property is only RM180k, or 10% depreciation, developer still get to sell the property in the 1st year for RM160k, investor will get RM160k (capital)+zero capital appreciation+RM40k (guaranteed return for 5 years). Buyers will get RM40k (capital) - RM20k capital depreciation
Who's the real winner in such scheme?
Basically, compared to RTO scheme, this P2P scheme allows you to participate in the potential capital appreciation of the property but at the cost of forking out the first 20% (which many don't have). During the interim 5 years, you get to save the monthly rental or mortgage repayment (no monthly cash outflow) but at the 5th year, you have to face the moment of truth. You either have to qualify for a proper mortgage loan or sell the house which I hope the example above has already demonstrated the risk.
The real clear winner here is property developers and agents/portals that sell properties. Regardless of which way it is funded, developers clear their inventory and pocket the proceeds while property agents/portals pocket the commission or transaction fees. In the process, whether they have sold you a house that you cannot afford with money that you do not have, that's not their problem.
While on paper developers are giving a 20% discount to fund the investors' return, if you ask around, many property projects are now offering rebates of easily up to 20%, some even as high as 40%! For these developers, this P2P scheme not only allows them to get back 80% of the property value (by giving 20% discount), it also has a clause that allow them to enjoy any capital appreciation up to 20% by the 5th year. It is almost a no-brainer to them.
Investors may also be a winner here with guaranteed 5% per annum return with shared potential capital appreciation. As long as the property does not depreciate beyond 20%, it would not affect your principal plus return. Taking into account the annual return, the property also potentially have to depreciate up to 40% before it really hits your capital.
The clear loser is still the buyer. Not only you have to come up with the 20% upfront amount, you have to forgo the first 20% capital appreciation to the developer. Any any depreciation will hit you first up to 20% before it hits investors while developer have zero downside.
Irresponsible scheme attracting irresponsible buyer, potentially causing further pain in the future
https://www.edgeprop.my/content/1441326/too-good-it%E2%80%99s-true-say-fundmyhome-first-homebuyers
If you read the article above, you will know that it is already showing signs that it is attracting the wrong crowd. I will extract some of the paragraphs below.
"But now lyliasani can tell his friends that he owns a home in Semenyih under FundMyHome after having started working for just one year. “My parents helped me with the 20% payment to purchase the home in Semenyih, which is near their home now. I’m not immediately sure if I will be staying in the new house but that is a place that I can call my own,” he said."
So now buying property is a bragging rights to your friend? If you can't afford a house when you just started working, why not try saving up for it? In the end, you are relying on your parents to pay the initial 20% you don’t have and you are not even sure you want to stay there. So this is just all for investment? With money that you don’t have, that sounds more like speculation.
Another homebuyer under FundMyHome is Abdul Fattah Ahmad, who also shared the joy of owning his first home. The 29-year-old who has been working as an executive in the financial sector for three years has little discretionary income to afford a mortgage. “However, my wages have remained stagnant in the past three years while the cost of living and house prices have both gone up. And even if I have saved up enough money to pay the downpayment, it is very difficult for me to repay the loan,” he said. “This is an attractive proposal and when I first heard about it, I was stunned because there is no need for mortgages! This scheme is certainly not conventional and I’m very excited to finally own my dream home with the 20% payment that my family assisted me with,” he said.
Why little discretionary income and why have wages remained stagnant, I’m afraid only you can answer them yourself. But it’s clear that you are not yet ready financially to own a house. So now again another example of relying on family assistance and attracted by the concept of no monthly payments, yet wanting to own a house and hope it will appreciate. Hoping for freebies in life? Again sounds more like speculation.
From these examples above, you can see that these buyers have no biz in owning a house, at least not yet. They just started working, yet to save enough money, so why tempt them into buying a house that they can’t afford? If they are financially not ready and yet bought a house with a get rich quick mentality, chances are 5 years down the road , they still may not be able to afford that house. Then guess what, all these properties will come back and flood the market and worsen the current property glut.
Some may say “Property prices always appreciate”. My answer is why don’t you ask those who bought a house in the past 2-3 years. And what if property price do not appreciate enough or worse still, depreciate? Are the buyers even aware of the risks involved?
Why do property developers and portals have to prey on these financially vulnerable buyers?
P2P lending is not the answer
Property developers need to wake up and slow down their developments and stop building houses that general public cannot afford. Meanwhile, government need to upgrade the workforce’s skillset and wages so that the purchasing power increase over time.
P2P is not the answer. It is merely an individual or company’s selfish intentions and biz plans which somehow creeps into our national budget. Stop targeting the financially vulnerable segment and try to portray yourself as one with noble intentions. As for the insider info, I don’t suppose anything can be done. SC has not even launched the P2P framework for such scheme yet somebody already came up all ready for that. I guess even SC has to retrospectively recognise this scheme after such framework is issued. All potentially because someone has some powerful friends in government.
The Pakatan government may not derive any benefit from such scheme but by doing so, they are still showing that some corporations/individuals have undue influence over government policies and have an unfair advantage over others. This is almost UMNO-like behaviour.
We voted for a government that should be better than that.
Disclaimer: The writer does not refer to any specific individual(s). Opinions written here are merely of the writer's and shall not be mistaken as hard facts. All connections drawn by the readers are of their own and the writer shall not be responsible for them
I thought I no longer need such disclaimer in a New Malaysia but past few days reminded me that the rich and powerful still towers above us common individual regardless of the standing government. I'm not sure if this article will get me into trouble but I feel that I have the moral obligation to highlight these issues. With this, I hope that more awareness can be created and people can avoid falling into such financial traps.
More articles on Jay's market diary
Further explosing FundMyHome and how the scheme shortchanges property buyers
Created by Jay | Nov 17, 2018
Why I think capital gains tax could be disastrous for Bursa and the country
Created by Jay | Oct 14, 2018
Discussions
13 people like this. Showing 50 of 204 comments
Why seeking bank to finance the 80%, use govt reserved fund,and institution like EPF. Once the citizen's accommodation was well take care of, the economy effect generated is far more than whatever can imagine. Despite of this, can also cease of problem of "goreng" property. Govt should also take responsibility to build more house and share office or public space for incubate new startup company. By the philosophy of housing is for accommodation not for investing.
2018-11-09 12:25
Govt immediately got one stone two bird KPI.
1. Using new technology in building material like use recycle plastic or interlock bric combining 3D printing, the housing price can be suppress to only RM40k for 500 sf in 1 month can finished build up. Increase the ROE. Cease out the unhealhty overloaded activities of property investing so as to convert to high end valued generated sector.
2. Incubate more tech startup by inviting no matter local or foreign talent and investor in attractive working and living policy. Combine with new concept of public space, office and universities and industrial and arm force cooperation ecosystem to generate more income per personal.
2018-11-09 12:52
Not true loh....!!
Say property price rm 1 million.
Trust ac
1. 20% buyer
2. 20% property developer
Interest rates 4% pa
Rm 400,000 x 4% pa = rm 16k
The investor need 5% pa thus rm 800k x 5% pa = rm 40k.
Thus deficit funding of rm 24k pa loh....!!
2018-11-09 12:58
If govt got lubang that can build house under 100k. (I know they got). Who the hell wanna buy 1 million house. It can be categoried as luxury item but not for house policy. The number of luxury housing should be control at 0.01% of total housing policy. The market will eliminate the overvalued house build by speculator or immoral investor.
2018-11-09 13:09
same situation if the house is rm 100k....the financing deficit to guarantee 5% pa is still rm 2.4k pa loh...!!
Posted by sjwee3 > Nov 9, 2018 01:09 PM | Report Abuse
If govt got lubang that can build house under 100k. (I know they got). Who the hell wanna buy 1 million house. It can be categoried as luxury item but not for house policy. The number of luxury housing should be control at 0.01% of total housing policy. The market will eliminate the overvalued house build by speculator or immoral investor.
2018-11-09 13:13
Jay,
Where did it say that the developer will pay 5% per annum to the banks guranteed?
Isnt the 5% self deducting upon sale or refinance?
Developers can consider giving 20% discount, and pay the 20% for the buyer i guess.
2018-11-09 13:19
ironic, considering that we have been brainwashed into thinking buying a house cannot lose money one.
2018-11-09 13:20
The housing ROE is governed by cheap material but good quality and shorter build time. RM 40k within 1 month per unit no matter what kind of the house's technology already exist now. This is the fact that can trembling the perporty speculator, and found they badly deny and ignore it.
2018-11-09 13:22
Just to open tender for house developer control under RM 40k to 50k per unit. A lot of speculators die.
2018-11-09 13:29
Which govt were wanna see for the economy was doomed by a lot of speculator. Just to revitalize the economy that long time not seen it blooming.
2018-11-09 13:35
WTF the buyer own 20% of the property equity whereas the financer own 80% equity loh....!!
If lose monies....the 1st losses cover by the buyer 1st 20% downpayment.
Above 20% losses the financer cover loh...!!
What if the property gain ???
The financer need to take 1st 20% gain based on 5% pa guaranteed....balance gain share 80% financer and 20% buyer loh...!!
The buyer is a sucker here loh...pay for legal fees, valuation fees etc...also guarantee financer 20% or 5% pa for their gain at the end only have 20% of the equity of the house loh...!!
On the downside need to guarantee the financer, pay expenses and lose and lose the 1st homeownership tax exemption rights when he decide to dispose his 20% equity loh.....!!
I thought the scheme is suppose to help n protect the poor buyer loh ??
But end up taking advantage of the poor buyer loh....!!
The PH govt very stupid loh.....!!
2018-11-09 13:40
cronyism is alive in malaysia baru: https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/451068
2018-11-09 13:45
The more govt build the unprofit house the more the speculator going to surrender their high price property. Let them collapse. Yes, it was foreseen that will happened no far from now. Their time counted!
2018-11-09 13:47
case 1: https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/451068
case 2: https://www.nst.com.my/business/2018/11/429345/country-heights-edges-closer-issuing-1b-horse-currency
Cronyism is alive in malaysia Baru
2018-11-09 13:49
We can estimate when will the market crash. But we can manly force it by helding nonprofit and anti-spaculator housing policy to collapse the housing price which was deem too high already.
2018-11-09 13:57
If that P2p scheme exercuted, I assure a lot of people rushing to queue long like JPJ summon pay recently.
2018-11-09 14:01
by sjwee3 > Nov 9, 2018 02:01 PM | Report Abuse
If that P2p scheme exercuted, I assure a lot of people rushing to queue long like JPJ summon pay recently.
========
good
2018-11-09 14:05
Where to find such thing in the world.
1. Govt guarantee.
2. Reserved fund financing 80%.
3. Perpetualty Ownership.
4. Participation in market with 20% of price.
5. Forcing market to reduce price.
2018-11-09 14:18
Where to find such thing in the world.
1. Govt guarantee.
2. Reserved fund financing 80%.
3. Perpetualty Ownership.
4. Participation in market with 20% of price.
5. Forcing market to reduce price.
6. Restructure socioeconomic.
2018-11-09 14:27
The most importantly restructuring socioeconomic, if not youngster work like a fool. And the boss hire them like a fool.
2018-11-09 14:30
this is also an excellent time to launch such products....when market is down......
2018-11-09 14:35
I think it is good for youngster to have more spending power, rather than just slave for installments......good for the economy too.
2018-11-09 14:37
Why have to held the debt of RM500k after finish schooling and start to work just to cover the fee and greediness of previous generation? Is that the benchmark of living in one city?. How many didn't go through that by speculation, and benefit by previous unsaturated market of cheap price? And how many live below benchmark? Is that mean they have no human right to live in?
2018-11-09 14:53
Think logically....what cronysism fundmyhome ??
The PH govt endorse it without forcing anyone to join and without coming up even a single sen mah...!!
Although raider see it is a stupid scheme....but it is not cronynism, why leh ???
Ans; If tomorrow another another alexlac can come with a smarter & better product...nothing can stop PH govt endorsing it loh...!!
Raider say if govt do not force people to buy and do not come up with money to support the product.....what cronynism raider ask loh ??
2018-11-09 17:54
Putrajaya says FundMyHome not a monopoly, more players welcome
Malay Mail Syed Jaymal Zahiid,Malay Mail 26 minutes ago .
Tony Pua said the government expects more platforms like FundMyHome to surface once the nuts and bolts of the scheme have been ironed out by the first quarter of 2019. — Picture by Yusof Mat Isa
KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 9 — The peer-to-peer crowdfunding platform, FundMyHome, will not have a monopoly over the newly-proposed home financing scheme sector, the political secretary to Minister of Finance Tony Pua said today.
The Damansara MP said the government expects more platforms to surface once the nuts and bolts of the scheme have been ironed out by the first quarter of 2019.
“Let me explain, FundMyHome is not a monopoly,” Pua told a forum on Budget 2019 organised by AmBank here.
“The Securities Commission will regulate as more exchange platforms will come in, we are open to more coming in,” he added.
Sceptics of the scheme have raised over how FundMyHome have been entrusted to lead the pilot project, after it was revealed that the platform’s owners are linked to leaders within the Pakatan Harapan government.
Pua explained that the scheme was included under PH’s maiden budget as part of efforts to seek “innovative” solutions to the country’s housing problem.
Financing has been found to be the chief factor preventing lower income earners, or the “B40s”, to buy homes. Most are unable to pass banks’ strict loan requirements and buy their first home.
2018-11-09 18:02
jay and speak...here is Tong talking about u......too bad I cannot write as well as this Tong.....but still the same ideas la......
and to all the critics in i3......fingers to u....
"All innovations go through stages of perception; from “ridicule” to “debate” and finally to “ it was obvious”.
2018-11-09 18:50
@Jon Choivo it was not mentioned explicitly but it did mention the buyer's 20% will be placed under a trust account, of which will be used to fund the investors' 5% guaranteed return.
so in essence, developer only receive effectively 80%, they forgo the 20% (as discount) to fund that 5% return a year. and they also build in a mechanism whereby if property appreciates, the first 20% goes to developer, effectively reimbursing them
2018-11-09 20:20
https://klse.i3investor.com/blogs/savemalaysia/181791.jsp
It's not about whether he can write or not. I lay my points here on his article
1. the scheme is exactly like what the Budget 2019 mentioned (because the idea came from Tong). the only difference is Tong haven't solicit public investment that's why it does not need to be regulated yet
2. Regulators can only come out with a proper framework when given independence. But now SC is pressured into coming out with such framework in Budget 2019 and deputy housing minister even gave a deadline of two weeks, the independence is doubtful
3. innovative stuffs doesn't equal to productive or beneficial stuffs. subprime crisis was caused by mortgage-backed securities (MBS), collateralised debt obligations (CDO), no-income-no-job(NINJA)loans and bunch of other innovative products
4. the condition on which subprime happen is not overbearing debt, it's simply the underlying speculative behavior which turns a productive asset like house into a speculative financial product. to the extent speculative buyers buy multiple houses with cash that they don't have (rely on refinancing)
Let's be honest, Tong was a developer himself and now he runs the property platform. Whose interest is he gonna look out for?
2018-11-09 20:22
Govt should intervene the price, control it under RM 100k, with the concept of talent absorbing policy. Disturbing the midle-end property, govt can open tender for developer to build house which under 100k. The more the market denied the fair price the more govt should build that affordable house. Abandoned the house which is overprice.
2018-11-09 20:52
Using interlock bric, govt already doing specimens test on school, village and govt building. Using 3D printing technology or if interlock brick. House price can be control under RM100k with shorter build time. Don't be fooled by developer and banker!
2018-11-09 20:58
put a developer, a banker and a buyer in the room....and out come the p2p scheme......great idea....
problem solved.
2018-11-09 20:59
The problem is with new building technology, previous developer ultimately have to suffer,due to oversupply with the house out of affordability of average citizen. This is the culprit. And they never expected it will happen and badly deny it.
2018-11-09 21:06
buy lar....stay 5 years then dowan lor....by 5 years ady got some money...can rent....rent for 5 years....then rent another 5 years 5 years like that....old ady check in old folk home.... no need worry give property to who and no need pay rpgt...kekekeke
2018-11-09 22:10
effectively rent free for rest of the life......the 20% just put in another house......deal of the century.....
2018-11-09 23:35
effectively rent free for rest of the life......the 20% just put in another house......deal of the century.....or until come across Jho Low fortune then buy a mansion for cash.....
so, never need to pay a single sen in interest for the rest of the life..........starting from a young age.
2018-11-09 23:37
hahaha. Just read this. Some of you thinking of goreng2, but i don't think it will follow your wish. Tony pua says it will be limited to
1. affordable housing
2. first time house owner.
Hahaha
https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/451196
2018-11-10 08:08
exactly the kind of attitude this P2P scheme promotes, speculative and thought that there's a free ride to prosperity
2018-11-10 08:48
@Jon Choivo there is an article and table in The Edge weekly that shows how profits are distributed among investors, developers and buyers. That should give you a clear picture. Apologies for I don't know how to screenshot it over here
2018-11-10 08:56
sums it up well....its not about gambling.....its about smart.....effectively rent free for rest of the life......the 20% just put in another house......deal of the century.....or until come across Jho Low fortune then buy a mansion for cash.....
so, never need to pay a single sen in interest for the rest of the life..........starting from a young age.
2018-11-10 10:25
Jay, truly appreciate your work here. The poor has to be educated on this 'pyramid' scheme..
In the future..perhaps very near future we can no longer expect return higher than 3%...population growth will come to a stand still.
Japan is a very good example.
2018-11-10 18:01
probability...no surprise to me....u think the poorer people cannot be trusted...well, I think the poorer people are just as smart, maybe on many occasions smarter than probability.
2018-11-10 18:05
Post a Comment
Featured Posts
New Update. Discover investment communities that resonate with your ideas
Apps
Top Articles
1
https://dividendguy67.blogspot.com
3
4
Good Articles to Share
Could Kamala Harris beat Donald Trump in November's presidential race?
5
Good Articles to Share
Iranian warship capsizes during repairs in port of Bandar Abbas
6
Good Articles to Share
7
Good Articles to Share
Jonathan Turley unveils exciting new book 'Free Speech in the Age of Rage'
8
Good Articles to Share
Why Impossible Foods signed hot dog-eating legend Joey Chestnut #yahoofinance #youtubeshorts
#
Stock
Score
Daily Stocks
Stock Name
Last
Change
Volume
Stock Name
Last
Change
Volume
Stock Name
Last
Change
Volume
MQ Trading Signals
Stock
Time
Signal
Duration
No trading signals available.
Stock
Time
Signal
Duration
No trading signals available.
Featured Advertisers / Partners
Ride The Bull Short The Bear
CS Tan
4.9 / 5.0
This book is the result of the author's many years of experience and observation throughout his 26 years in the stockbroking industry. It was written for general public to learn to invest based on facts and not on fantasies or hearsay....
Jay
@qqq3 I do not object to something just because it is new, I object it because it's problematic and could create a lot of negative issues
it's creative I give you that, but not exactly fair to buyers and clearly done with vested interest by developers and the portal.
despite numerous very detailed explanations, you don't seem to be interested in understanding or provide a valid argument against them. you keep saying it's great for everyone but can you back it up with explanations? if a person blindly supports something without proper reasoning, I can't help but doubt your motivations
I welcome constructive arguments but I don't think you are going to engage in one. your next comment probably will again be how great this scheme is, how wrong and sceptical is everyone (with zero points to support)....
2018-11-09 12:02