Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
GEMS FROMTHE NORTH
1
About us
.
2
Incorporated in 1982, Raine & Horne International Zaki + Partners Sdn.
Bhd. is a firm of Chartered Surveyors and Registered Valuers. Our practice
covers a wide range of services including property valuation, investment and
project management, property management, real estate agency and
property consultancy.
The firm currently operates twelve (12) offices in Malaysia: Kuala Lumpur,
Petaling Jaya, Subang Jaya, Kelang, Johor Bahru, Melaka, Ipoh, Seremban,
Kuantan, Penang, Kota Kinabalu and Kuching.
Since its inception and establishment, Raine & Horne International Zaki +
Partners Sdn. Bhd. has enjoyed an outstanding and enviable reputation and
success. The firm has received wide recognition from all quarters, nationally
and internationally.
Founded in 1883, Raine & Horne is one of the world’s largest real estate
organisations with offices and affiliates all over the world, including in the
major cities of South East Asia, Europe, Canada, USA, Fiji, Australia, New
Zealand, Japan and Africa.
Raine & Horne International Zaki + Partners Sdn. Bhd. aims to provide our
clients with quality professional service. Raine & Horne International Zaki +
Partners Sdn. Bhd. is committed to the Quality Management System required by
ISO 9001:2008 Standards.
Our team comprises of highly qualified partners in various expertise which
authorize us to offer broad ranges of services in:
Professional Valuation Services
Corporate Advisory Services
Project Management
Property Management & Maintenance
Real Estate Agency
Auctioning
Market Research & Feasibility Studies
Property Investment Consultancy
Building Auditing
Bio Asset Valuation
Forensic Valuation
CYF.A8/10.14
Contents
3
Summary………………..........…...........4
Overview…………....…….....................7
Components of Gems…..…...................8
Basic Information……………….........12
Residents’ Data.....................................15
Property Market in Malaysia………..19
Residential Market for Gems..............26
Residential Market in Penang.............35
Residential Market in Kedah..............37
Residential Market in Perlis……........39
References………………………….....41
Contact us…………………………….42
International Affiliations…………….43
CYF.A8/10.14
Summary
.
4
Basic Information
The northern territories of Peninsular Malaysia consists of 3 states; which are
collectively known as “Gems from the North”. They include Penang, Kedah,
and Perlis. Two of the smallest states in Malaysia (Perlis and Penang) are
located in this region. Although geographically in proximity, the rate of
development across the region varies considerably. Penang is one the most
developed and urbanized state in the country, whereas Perlis has one of the
lowest urbanization rate in Malaysia.
These northern Gems only account for a small portion of Malaysia’s land mass
but is collectively growing in tandem with the country in many different ways.
They include productivity, healthcare, population size, concentration,
urbanization, job opportunities, income, and property market. It should be noted
that Penang is in a more advanced stage of development, whereas Perlis is
lagging. Gems’ property value made up 17% of its GDP output for 2013. The
amount of activity was higher in the area as well with greater percentile of
property transactions per 100 population. However, this rate of increment is
diminishing slowly.
Residents in Gems preferred to dwell nearer to the centre of commercial,
industrial, and agricultural activities of respective states. They include capital of
respective states such as district of Timur Laut (George Town) in Penang, and
Kuala Muda (Sungai Petani) and Kota Setar (Alor Setar) in Kedah. On the other
hand, Malaysia’s population is aging slowly (but still in its early stages).
Median age was 26.2 in 2010. Higher number of the population are leaving
childhood and entering the workforce. This is the same for Gems. As for
ethnicity, Gems’ composition is similar to that of Malaysia as a whole.
The LQ/H ratio which came in at 1.18 for Gems has confirmed that there are no
current shortages of houses in this area. However, the stock availability is not
too high. An exception was noticed in the state of Penang which recorded a high
LQ/H ratio when compared to the rest of the northern territories. The reading of
1.21 suggests that this area might be showing signs of excess residential
properties.
CYF.A8/10.14
Summary
Property Market
The property market is highly cyclical with a high correlation between volume
and value. However, this trend was not observed in 2013. Value increased
moderately, while volume dropped considerably. Average price per transaction
had the best run in the 10 years being reviewed. Nonetheless, the residential
sector was more resilient compared to the rest of the market.
Residential sector made up the bulk of the total property market in Malaysia as
well as Gems. The combined residential number of transactions for Gems
accounted for 14% of the total transactions of Malaysia. Turnover rate was fair
at 3.37%, but has declined slightly in terms of YOY. While percentage of
unsold new launches were at the middle range of the country’s list. Within the
vicinity of Gems, a slow trend was seen emerging; where the total weightage of
agricultural sector was gradually shifting towards residential and industrial
sectors.
The state of Penang held the majority of residential transactions for Gems due
to its considerable population size, state of development, and wealth effect. The
recent YOY decline in transacted volume was extremely evident in Penang
(-24%). The entire northern territory was declining at a faster rate than the
country. Gems’ average price per transaction was increasing at a similar pace
with Malaysia; led by Perlis and Penang in Q1 2014.
Gems provide 14% of the total residential supply in Malaysia, which is quite
comparable to the number of transactions (14%) as mentioned earlier.
Collective IS/ES and PS/ES ratios for Gems were slightly higher than national
average. Both instances were led by Penang, followed by Perlis, and Kedah.
Distribution of transactions was quite balanced with slight skewness to the
right; which placed minor emphasis on lower price tags. The highest share was
captured by the price range of RM 50,001 – 100,000. Two of the most preferred
house types for Gems were terrace houses, and condominiums and apartments.
Almost all house types recorded positive YOY changes for average price per
transaction and the rate of increment seemed to be consolidating in the near
term when compared to QOQ.
5CYF.A8/10.14
Summary
A summary of the current residential market in Gems can be illustrated in the
volume and price chart of Figure 1.
In the most recent quarter of Q1 2014, Kedah was in the spotlight with high
average price per transaction growth rate, while prices were fairly stagnant in
Penang. Prices in Perlis depreciated rapidly. Though all states were badly hit by
decreasing volume of transactions, with Penang the least severely affected. The
performance of Gems as a whole was in a deteriorating state.
6
Figure 1: Q1 2014 QOQ changes of Gems for Residential Volume and
Average Price per Transaction (NAPIC, 2014).
CYF.A8/10.14
-8.66
-25.13
-13.24-15.62
1.07
19.07
-30.45
7.68
PENANG KEDAH PERLIS TOTAL
QO
Q C
HA
NG
ES (
%)
VOLUME AVERAGE PRICE PER TRANSACTION
The immense preference for terrace houses was fairly symmetrical across Gems
with 2 -3 storey terrace houses being the main choice in Penang, while single
storey terrace houses were transacted the most in Kedah and Perlis. Heavy
weightage of strata properties was only present in Penang. A growing number of
transactions was witnessed within the price range of RM 200,000 and below in
Q1 2014. In addition, gross rental yields for strata properties were higher than
landed properties in Penang, while average gross rental yields for landed
properties were higher in Kedah and Perlis compared to Penang.
Overview
The northern territories of Peninsular Malaysia consists of 3 states; which are
collectively known as “Gems from the North”. They include Penang, Kedah,
and Perlis. Two of the smallest states in Malaysia (Perlis and Penang) are
located in this region. Although geographically in proximity, the rate of
development across the region varies considerably. Penang is one the most
developed and urbanized state in the country, whereas Perlis has one of the
lowest urbanization rate in Malaysia.
Penang is the only island state in Malaysia, which is prominently known as
“the Pearl of the Orient”. It was originally part of the Malay Sultanate of
Kedah. Due to the lack of land for development, a few land reclamation
projects were untaken to provide suitable low-lying land in high-demand areas
such as Tanjung Tokong, Jelutong, and Queensbay.
Ancient Kedah is one of the oldest civilization in Southeast Asia. The state’s
mainland has a relatively flat terrain, which is suitable for growing rice. Thus, it
is considered the “rice bowl” of Malaysia; accounting for about half of
Malaysia’s total production of rice. In 2008, the state government banned the
conversion of paddy fields to housing and industrial lots to protect the rice
industry. Under the 9th Malaysia Plan, the Northern Corridor Economic
Region (NCER) was implemented; in which an economic area that focuses on
automotive and aerospace industries were established in Kedah. The tourism-
renowned Langkawi island is located in Kedah as well.
The smallest state in Malaysia; is situated at the northern edge of Peninsular
Malaysia, bordered by Thailand. Similar to Penang, Perlis was originally part of
Kedah. The Coat of Arms of Perlis consists of a sturdy green of wreath of padi,
indicating the wealth of the kingdom and the chief economic activity of the
people.
7CYF.A8/10.14
Components of Gems
Compared to other selective regions that were being previously reviewed; such
as the Inner Valley (Klang Valley), Outer Valley, and Borneo, these northern
territories are considered relatively small and diverse.
There is no current official designation of boundaries for Gems and groupings
of selective areas could be highly subjective. For the purpose of studying the
housing market, these selective areas are grouped according to the National
Property Information Centre (NAPIC, 2014). They include:
1. Penang (5 districts)
(Island: Timur Laut, Barat Daya; Mainland: Seberang Perai Utara,
Seberang Perai Tengah, Seberang Perai Selatan)
2. Kedah (12 districts)
(Kuala Muda, Kota Setar, Kulim, Kubang Pasu, Baling, Pendang,
Langkawi, Yan, Sik, Padang Terap, Pokok Sena, Bandar Baharu)
3. Perlis
8CYF.A8/10.14
Figure 2: Georgetown (left), and Menara Alor Setar (Right).
Components of Gems
Figure 3: Map of Penang’s districts (2010 Population and Weightage
in brackets) (Department of Statistics Malaysia, 2014).
9
1. 510,996
(33%)
TOTAL PENANG = 1,526,324:
(42% OF GEMS)
CYF.A8/10.14
2. 362,820
(24%)
3. 288,692
(19%)
4. 197,131
(13%)
5. 166,685
(11%)
Components of Gems
Figure 4: Map of Kedah’s districts (2010 Population and Weightage in
brackets) (Department of Statistics Malaysia, 2014).
10
TOTAL KEDAH = 1,899,751:
(52% OF GEMS)
CYF.A8/10.14
1. 443,488
(23%)
2. 357,176
(19%)
3. 281,260
(15%)
4. 214,479
(11%)
5. 132,304
(7%)
6. 93,598
(5%)
7. 92,784
(5%)
8. 66,606
(4%)
9. 66,387
(3%)
10. 61,970
(3%)
11. 48,347
(3%)
12. 41,352
(2%)
Components of Gems
Figure 5: Map of Perlis’s district (2010 Population and Weightage in
bracket) (Department of Statistics Malaysia, 2014).
11
TOTAL PERLIS = 225,590:
(6% OF GEMS)
CYF.A8/10.14
1. PERLIS
225,590 (100%)
Basic Information
Table 1: Depiction of Gems and Malaysia (2012) (Department of
Statistics Malaysia, 2014).
According to table 1, it is worth noting that the current Gems has a combined land
area of 11,251 km2, which is only 3.41% of the country’s total land mass. However,
the subsequent data of the area is not proportional to its land size. Gems is home to
about 13% of the country’s total population, produces 10.83% of the country’s
GDP, and supplies 12.85% of Malaysia’s total labour force.
Average annual population growth rate and total fertility rate are -0.36% lower and
0.01% higher than the national readings, whereas life expectancy is -0.96% lower.
Both Kedah and Perlis had higher fertility rates, lower population growth rates, and
lower life expectancy rates; suggesting poor family planning, migration of workers,
and lesser standards of living due to lower life expectancy.
GDP growth rate of Gems is -0.28% lower than average and GDP per capita is
-5.08% higher than the country’s mean; dragged down by Kedah and Perlis but
supported by Penang. Such data illustrates the potential of Gems (namely Kedah
and Perlis) to improve on its productivity and standards of living. Job opportunities
are comparable for Gems to other parts of the nation with participation rate of
-0.77% and unemployment rate of -0.46% lower than the national average. Again,
Perlis was the main drag in both aspects.
12CYF.A8/10.14
DEPICTION PENANG KEDAH PERLIS TOTAL MALAYSIA %
1. AREA (KM2) 1,031 9,425 795 11,251 330,290 3.41
2. POPULATION (MILLION) 1.63 1.99 0.24 3.86 29.52 13.083. AVERAGE ANNUAL POPULATION GROWTH
RATE (%) 1.50 1.10 0.70 1.24 1.60 -0.36
4. TOTAL FERTILITY RATE 1.60 2.50 2.40 2.11 2.10 0.01
5. LIFE EXPECTANCY (YEARS) 74.90 73.22 72.95 73.91 74.63 -0.96
6. GDP(A) GDP AT CONSTANT 2005 PRICES ( RM
MILLION) 52,530 25,307 3,535 81,372 751,471 10.83
(B) GDP PER CAPITA AT CURRENT PRICE (RM) 36,669 15,832 18,150 29,384 30,956 -5.08
(C) GDP GROWTH RATE (%) 5.00 6.10 4.50 5.32 5.60 -0.28
7. EMPLOYMENT
(A) LABOUR FORCE ('000) 786.10 809.10 90.60 1,685.80 13,119.60 12.85
(B) PARTICIPATION RATES (%) 68.80 61.70 56.40 64.73 65.50 -0.77
(C) UNEMPLOYMENT RATE (%) 2.00 2.90 4.00 2.54 3.00 -0.46
Basic Information
Table 2: Continuation of Economic Data (2013) (Department of Statistics
Malaysia, 2014).
Besides providing a fair share of the nation’s GDP, Gems’s property market is
slightly ahead compared to its pace of development. In 2013, the area’s combined
nominal GDP and property market value accounted for 10.83% and 12.38% of that
of the nation; with its property market growth rate and prices increasing at a faster
rate than its GDP growth rate.
Property market of the northern territories made up a significant share of the local
economy; ratio of property market value per GDP was 17.36%, which was 2.18%
higher than Malaysia. Population density and urbanization rate were 753.42 person
per km2 and 74.84% respectively. They were 771.61% and 3.84% higher than
Malaysia’s average. Such figures depict that Gems is a highly concentrated and
fairly urbanized area in the context of a nation. Kedah and Perlis deviate
substantially from Penang in this regard.
Gems’ property market was noticed to be more vibrant than the national average.
Number of property transactions per 100 population =
2013: (Gems): 1.38; (Malaysia): 1.30
2012: (Gems): 1.61; (Malaysia): 1.50
In addition, it was noticed that the transacted volume of property market in
northern territories was cooling at a faster rate than the country’s mean. Gems was
one of the more severely affected area in Malaysia (led by Penang); YOY change
for number of transaction was recorded at -14.19%, which was worse than the
country’s mean of -10.85%. Whereas value of transactions increased by 3.95% last
year, compared to a 6.67% increment for the nation (JPPH, 2014).
13CYF.A8/10.14
DEPICTION PENANG KEDAH PERLIS TOTAL MALAYSIA %
1. GDP (NOMIMAL) (RM BILLION) 65.78 31.69 4.43 101.89 940.97 10.83
2. PROPERTY MARKET VALUE (RM BILLION) 12.90 4.44 0.35 17.69 142.84 12.383. PROPERTY MARKET VALUE/GDP
(NOMINAL) (%) 19.61 14.01 7.91 17.36 15.18 2.18
4. DENSITY (PER KM2) (2010) 1,500.00 199.00 280.00 753.42 86.44 771.61
5. URBANISATION RATE (%) (2010) 90.80 64.60 51.40 74.84 71.00 3.84
Basic Information
Table 3: Grouping of Household and Living Quarters by State (2010)
(Department of Statistics Malaysia, 2014).
14
- Ratio of existing residential stock per 100 population =
(Gems): 17.52; (Malaysia): 16.
- Ratio of total population to number of person per household =
(Gems): 884,180 unit of houses (breakeven point); assuming household size is
held constant.
- Existing residential stock =
(Gems): 676,117 unit of houses (an additional of 208,063 units is required to
reach breakeven point); assuming household size is held constant.
As expected, Kedah recorded the highest count for both the number of household
(443,040: 50.16%) and living quarters (518,191: 49.56%). Coming in second was the
state of Penang with 387,180 households (43.84%) and 466,576 living quarters (44.62%).
Perlis only accounted a small portion of the pie; with households and living quarters at
about 6 percent of Gems.
True to the wealth effect, Kedah which has the lowest GDP per capita (lowest purchasing
power) has the highest ratio of person per household, whereas Perlis which is not too far
off has the highest ratio of person per living quarter. The overall readings for Gems were
4.13 person per household and 3.49 person per living quarters. The combined LQ/H ratio
which came in at 1.18 for Gems has confirmed that there are no current shortages of
houses in this area. However, the stock availability is not too high.
It is anticipated that there could be a high possibility of smaller household size in the
future. Such a reduction in the number of person per household would directly increase
the demand for new living quarters and strain the existing housing stock in the market. An
exception was noticed in the state of Penang which recorded a high LQ/H ratio when
compared to the rest of the northern territories. The reading of 1.21 suggests that this area
might be showing signs of excess residential properties.
CYF.A8/10.14
DISTRICT HOUSEHOLD (H)
% LIVING QUARTERS (LQ)
% PERSON / H
PERSON / LQ
LQ / H
PENANG 387,180 43.84 466,576 44.62 3.94 3.27 1.21
KEDAH 443,040 50.16 518,191 49.56 4.29 3.67 1.17
PERLIS 52,995 6.00 60,801 5.82 4.26 3.71 1.15
TOTAL 883,215 100.00 1,045,568 100.00 4.13 3.49 1.18
Residents’ Data
Figure 6: Breakdown of Penang’s population by district (2010)
(Department of Statistics Malaysia, 2014).
Figure 7: Breakdown of Kedah’s population by district (2010)
(Department of Statistics Malaysia, 2014).
It may seem logical that most inhabitants will usually reside around the central
hub of commercial activities. In the context of Gems from the North, this area
of central activities include state capitals, industrial and agricultural areas. In
the case for Penang, the district of Timur Laut which houses the capital of
George Town; has the highest portion of the state’s population. Whereas in
Kedah, districts of Kuala Muda (Sungai Petani) and Kota Setar (Alor Setar)
are the core of the state.
15CYF.A8/10.14
TIMUR LAUT33%
SEBERANG PERAI TENGAH
24%
SEBERANG PERAI UTARA
19%
BARAT DAYA13%
SEBERANG PERAI SELATAN
11%
KUALA MUDA23%
KOTA SETAR19%
KULIM15%
KUBANG PASU11%
BALING7%
PENDANG5%
LANGKAWI5%
YAN4%
SIK3%
PADANG TERAP
3%
POKOK SENA3%
BANDAR BAHARU
2%
Residents’ Data
Figure 8: Demographics of Malaysia by Age (2000 & 2010) (Department of
Statistics Malaysia, 2014).
33.30
62.80
3.90
27.60
67.30
5.10
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
< AGE 15 AGE 15-64 > AGE 64
WEI
GH
TAG
E (%
)
AGE GROUP
2000 2010
Age
Malaysia’s population is aging slowly (but still in its early stages); with lower
portion of children age group (< age 15) in 2010 compared to 2000. Working age
adults (age 15 - 64) and retirement segments (> age 64) have increased by 4.5%
and 1.2% respectively. Median age has increased from 23.6 (2000) to 26.2
(2010); which is still a relatively young population.
The country’s dependency ratio has dropped from 0.59 (2000) to 0.49 (2010),
reinforcing the fact that:
1. Population growth is slowing
2. Children age group is diminishing (entering the age of workforce)
3. Working age group is increasing
4. More working adults are supporting the non-working classes
(children and elders).
16CYF.A8/10.14
Residents’ Data
Figure 9: Demographics of Gems by Age (2010) (Department of
Statistics Malaysia, 2014).
Figure 10: Dependency ratio of Gems (2010) (Department of Statistics
Malaysia, 2014).
The northern territories account for 13.08% of the total population in Malaysia and has a
dependency ratio of 0.86; which is quite high. This indicates a significant proportion of
non-working age groups (children and elders) as compared to the working age groups. It
was worth noting that Penang has the lowest dependency ratio in Gems (0.73). While
Perlis has an unusual ratio of more than 1, indicating there are more non-working age
groups (children and elders) than working age.
The overall population of Gems is very young as well; which is in tandem with the
national average. The 3 largest age groups are 0-19 (36.30%), 20-29 (17.33%), and 30-39
(13.93%). They account for 67.56% of the total population in Gems. However, the huge
gap between age group of 0-19 and 20-29 suggests that a large portion of the young
working adults are moving to possibly the Inner Valley in search of better job
opportunities. Even the highly developed state of Penang is not spared.17CYF.A8/10.14
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-75+
PO
PU
LATI
ON
AGE GROUPPERLIS PENANG KEDAH
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20
DEPENDENCY RATIO
PERLIS PENANG KEDAH
Residents’ Data
Figure 11: Demographics of Malaysia by Ethnicity (2010) (Department of
Statistics Malaysia, 2014).
BUMI62%
CHINESE22%
INDIANS7%
OTHERS1%
NON-CITIZEN
8%
Malaysia has a total population of
28.30 million as at 2010; with
61.87% as Bumiputeras, 22.58%
as Chinese, 6.70% as Indians,
0.64% classified as others, and
8.20% as non-citizens.
Figure 12: Demographics of Gems by Ethnicity (2010) (Department of
Statistics Malaysia, 2014).
Ethnicity
Gems’ overall population composition is similar to that of Malaysia; 61.70%
Bumiputeras, 25.22% Chinese, 7.81% Indians, 0.93% others, and 4.34% non-
citizens. However, districts within Gems has significantly different ethnic
composition.
In the state of Penang, Chinese and Bumiputeras made up the bulk of the
population (42.90% and 41.18% respectively). Whereas Indians came in at 9.82%.
In Kedah, the top three ethnic groups were Bumiputeras (75.26%), Chinese
(13.09%), and Indians (6.99%). Population composition in Perlis include 86.24%
Bumiputeras, 7.77% Chinese, 2.36% others, and 1.19% Indians.18CYF.A8/10.14
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
BUMIPUTERA CHINESE INDIANS OTHERS NON-CITIZEN
PO
PU
LATI
ON
ETHNICITYPERLIS PENANG KEDAH
Property market in Malaysia
Figure 13: Malaysia’s overall property market (2004 – 2013) (NAPIC, 2014).
-20.00
-10.00
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
% C
HA
NG
E YO
Y
VOLUME (% CHANGE) VALUE (% CHANGE) AVERAGE PRICE PER TRANSACTION (% CHANGE)
The property market in Malaysia is highly cyclical. There is a high correlation
between volume and value (correlation of efficiency value of 0.75; from 2003 -
2012). 2013 proved to an excepting year, which recorded the worst decline in
amount of transaction for the last 10 years; declining by -10.85% YOY.
However, the total value of transaction recorded a decent gain of 6.67% YOY. This
led to the biggest yearly gain in the last 10 years for the average price per
transaction (rising by a staggering 19.65%). It is yet to be determined that such a
rise in average price per transaction is sustainable if volume does not exist to
support it.
19CYF.A8/10.14
Property market in Malaysia
Figure 14: Volume of Malaysia property market by sectors (2004 – 2013)
(NAPIC, 2014).
-20.00
-10.00
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
% C
HA
NG
E YO
Y
RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL AGRICULTURAL DL & OTHERS
Volume
2013 saw a broad decrease over all sectors of the property market; led by the
commercial sector (-16.51%), industrial (-15.69%), agricultural (-12.37%),
residential (-9.70%), and development land and others (-6.99%).
Value
Unlike volume, the commercial sector witnessed the highest incremental in value
(27.96%), followed by the residential sector (6.34%), industrial (2.69%),
agricultural (-6.97%), and lastly development land and others (-8.89%).
For both of these instances, the residential property sector showed resilience
compared to the rest of the market.
Figure 15: Value of Malaysia property market by sectors (2004 – 2013)
(NAPIC, 2014).
-60.00
-40.00
-20.00
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
% C
HA
NG
E Y
OY
RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL
AGRICULTURAL
DL & OTHERS
20CYF.A8/10.14
Property market in Malaysia
Figure 16: Malaysia’s average price per transaction by sectors (RM in million
(2004 – 2013) (NAPIC, 2014).
Average price per transaction
In 2013, the commercial sector recorded the biggest change in the last 10 years
(53.27%), followed by the industrial sector (21.79%), residential (17.76%), and
agricultural (6.16%). Whereas average price per transaction for development land
and others marked the steepest unusual decline in the last 10 years (-43.28%).
Abiding by the norm, the industrial sector has the highest average price per
transaction of RM 1.46 million, followed by commercial (RM 1.04 million),
development land and others (RM 0.89 million), residential (RM 0.29 million),
and agricultural (RM 0.14 million).
21CYF.A8/10.14
Property market in Malaysia
Figure 17: Weightage of Malaysia property market by sectors (Volume)
(2004 – 2013) (NAPIC, 2014).
Weightage of sectors
The residential market made up the bulk of the total property market in
Malaysia; with a 10 year mean value of 63.87%, followed by the agricultural
sector (19.59%), commercial (9.36%), development land and others (4.67%), and
industrial (2.47%). A decrease in weightage for all sectors except residential
(0.82%), and development land and others (0.25) was observed in 2013.
22CYF.A8/10.14
Property market in Malaysia
Figure 18: Number of transactions by state in Malaysia (2012 – 2013)
(JPPH, 2014).
Number of transactions
In 2013, Selangor recorded the highest amount of transactions (81,955: 22%) in
Malaysia, followed by Johor (52,779: 14%), and Perak (46,234: 12%). These 3
states made up almost half of the total transactions in Malaysia. Kedah was ranked
number 5 out of the 16 states being examined (25,389: 7%), Penang was at the 6th
spot with 24,346 number of transactions at 6%, and Perlis was third last with
3,591 transactions (1%). The combined number of transactions in Borneo made up
approximately 14% of total transactions in Malaysia.
In terms of YOY changes, all states recorded negative growth rates except for
Johor (7.07%), and Perlis (5.93%). Kedah was ranked number 8 (-8.59%), while
Penang came in at number 13 (-21.41%). Gems as a whole was worse off than the
national average. The former declined by -14.19%, compared to a decline of
-10.85% of the latter.
23CYF.A8/10.14
27,775
30,977
3,390
25,389
24,3463,591
-8.59
-21.41
5.93
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
%U
NIT
S
2012 2013 % (YOY) 2013 COUNTRY MEAN (% YOY)
Property market in Malaysia
Figure 19: Turnover Rate of Malaysia Residential Market by state
(2012 & 2013) (JPPH, 2014).
Turnover rate (Residential)
For the year ended 2013, the state of Perak recorded the highest turnover rate in
Malaysia; clocking in at 4.35%, coming in second was Sarawak (4.04%), then
Melaka (3.92%). The bottom 3 states were Labuan (1.60%), Kelantan (2.28%), and
Sabah (2.29%). Gems has a combined turnover rate of 3.37%. The country’s mean
turnover rate was 3.34%.
In terms of YOY changes, Perlis was the highest (0.79%), followed by Johor
(0.37%), and then Pahang (0.22%). The bottom 3 states were Putrajaya (-2.85%),
Kuala Lumpur (-1.71%), and Pulau Pinang (-1.20%). Gems as a whole recorded
YOY change of -0.76%. The country’s mean YOY reading was -0.50%.
24CYF.A8/10.14
2.84
4.60
3.563.63
3.403.31
0.79
-1.20
-0.25
-3.5
-3
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
CH
AN
GE (%
)TU
RN
OV
ER (
%)
2012 2013 % (YOY) 2013 COUNTRY MEAN (% YOY)
Property market in Malaysia
Figure 20: Percentage of Unsold Residential Units (New Launches) by state in
Malaysia (2013) (JPPH, 2014).
Unsold units of New launches (Residential)
In 2013, based on individual states; Kelantan recorded the highest percentage of
unsold residential units (new launches) in Malaysia (66.70%), followed by
Terengganu (63.46%), and Sarawak (51.43%). Gems has a collective unsold
fraction of 41.75.%. The country’s mean reading was 43.90%.
In terms of YOY changes, Sarawak was the highest (11.21%), followed by
Kelantan (10.95%), and then Terengganu (5.35%). The bottom 3 states were
Perlis (-38.62%), Pahang (-8.67%), and Putrajaya (-7.74%). Gems has a mutual
YOY change of -8.36%. The country’s mean YOY reading was -3.22%.
25CYF.A8/10.14
51.99
78.15
42.15
45.92
39.5334.42
-6.07
-38.62
-7.73
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
CH
AN
GE (%
)UN
SOLD
(%
)
TOTAL UNSOLD 2012 TOTAL UNSOLD 2013
% CHANGE (1 YR) COUNTRY MEAN (1 YR)
Residential market for Gems
Figure 21: Weightage of Gems property market by sectors (Volume) (2013)
(JPPH, 2014).
Weightage by sectors
Similar to national norm, the residential market made up the bulk of the total
property market transactions in Gems; with a share of 63.31%, followed by
agricultural (18.37%), development land and others (8.25%), commercial sector
(8.05%), and industrial (2.02%). There was a shift in weightage from agricultural to
residential and industrial sectors as a share of the total transactions.
It is worth noting that the weightage of residential, commercial, industrial, and
agricultural sectors were lower than national average. Whereas development land
and others were higher.
YOY, most sectors recorded broad decrease except for the industrial sector
(2.97%). Such cutback was led by the agricultural sector (-26.45%), commercial
(-12.23%), residential (-12.15%), and lastly development land (-1.33%). Gems’
average was -14.19%.26CYF.A8/10.14
-30.00
-25.00
-20.00
-15.00
-10.00
-5.00
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
CH
AN
GES (%
)N
UM
BER
OF
TRA
NSA
CTI
ON
S
SUB-SECTORS PERLIS KEDAH PENANG YOY (%)
Residential market for Gems
Figure 22: Number of residential transactions by state for Gems (2013)
(JPPH, 2014).
Weightage by area (Residential)
Due to its population size, state of development, and wealth effect; Penang
captured the major share of total residential property transactions in the northern
territory. The state recorded 52.43% of Gems’ transaction, whereas Kedah and
Perlis account for 44% and 4% of the total transactions respectively. Gems as a
whole only possessed 13.71% of Malaysia’s total residential property market
transactions.
In terms of YOY, Penang was affected the most by the recent declining trend. The
state’s transactions declined by -23.92%. While Perlis and Kedah improved by
21.07% and 4.84% respectively. This resulted in Gems’ transactions to deteriorate
by -12.15%; which was worse than the national average of -9.70%.
27CYF.A8/10.14
-30.00
-25.00
-20.00
-15.00
-10.00
-5.00
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
PENANG KEDAH PERLIS TOTAL MALAYSIA
CH
AN
GES (%
)N
UM
BER
OF
TRA
NSA
CTI
ON
S
AREA2013 YOY (%)
Residential market for Gems
Figure 23: Average price per transaction of Residential Properties for Gems
(RM) (2013) (JPPH, 2014).
Average price per transaction (Residential)
Contrary to its dwindling volume, Penang has the highest average price per
transaction in the northern territory; RM 400,738 (YOY: 31.45%). Coming in
second was the minuscule state of Perlis with RM 172,564 (YOY: 49.27%). The
largest contributor in terms of land mass was last at RM 148,523 (YOY: 0.75%).
The combined average price per transaction for Gems was RM 281,616 (YOY:
16.42%). The country’s average was RM 292,661 (YOY: 17.76%). Hence the
absolute and relative values for both Gems were slightly lower than the national
average. Given the favorable conditions, there is high potential for further
development in this region (especially Kedah).
28CYF.A8/10.14
400,738
148,523
172,564
281,616292,661
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
PENANG KEDAH PERLIS AVERAGE MALAYSIA
CH
AN
GES (%
)A
VER
AG
E P
RIC
E P
ER T
RA
NSA
CTI
ON
(R
M I
N M
ILLI
ON
)
AREA2013 YOY (%)
Residential market for Gems
Figure 24: Supply compilation of Residential Properties for Gems (2013)
(JPPH, 2014).
Supply compilation
As usual, Penang hoards the largest number of existing residential stock in Gems
(55.90%), followed by Kedah (40.87%), and Perlis (3.23%). Incoming and planned
supplies were witnessed to be increasing at a steady pace.
In terms of IS/ES ratio, all 3 states were somewhat higher than the national
average. The national reading was 14.76%. Whereas for PS/ES ratio, only the state
of Penang (15.65%) was higher than the national average (13.05%). Perlis and
Kedah were both lower at 11.60% and 10.53% respectively.
Favorable economic and employment conditions, coupled with the progressive
state of property market in Penang; reinforced the fact that this island is indeed
“The Pearl of the Orient”. However, recent setbacks such as declining volume
transacted and turnover rate were most likely part of the consolidation process.
Nonetheless, strong price appreciation and improving incoming and planned
supplies might just imply the resilience of this island state.29CYF.A8/10.14
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
14.00
16.00
18.00
0
1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
7,000,000
PENANG KEDAH PERLIS TOTAL MALAYSIA
SUP
PLY R
ATIO
(%)
NU
MB
ER O
F U
NIT
S (S
UP
PLY
0
AREA
PLANNED SUPPLY (PS) INCOMING SUPPLY (IS) EXISTING STOCK (ES) IS/ES (%) PS/ES (%)
Residential market for Gems
Figure 25: Supply compilation of Residential Properties for Gems (2013)
(JPPH, 2014).
Supply compilation (Cont’d)
Referring to Figure 25, near term supply growth rate was strong with Penang
leading the charge at 17.06%. Whereas supply in the mid term was in a declining
state led by Penang as well at 15.65%.
When segregating new supply into physical availability, it was observed that
majority of the launches were under construction (54.20%). YOY changes for
newly launched and not constructed projects declined sharply across the board.
Whereas YOY changes for completed projects were tremendous in Penang and
Perlis but declined slightly in Kedah. Under construction units were positive in
both Penang and Kedah but declined by a large margin in Perlis.
The YOY change for newly launched units per total transactions was negative
across the northern territories (-3.86%). YOY for completed houses per total
transactions was positive except for Kedah (3.36%). While YOY for total launches
per total transactions was positive (7.84%); supported largely by Penang.30CYF.A8/10.14
-50.00
-40.00
-30.00
-20.00
-10.00
0.00
10.00
20.00
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
14.00
16.00
18.00
PENANG KEDAH PERLIS TOTAL MALAYSIA
YO
Y C
HA
NG
ES (%)
RA
TIO
(%
)
STATEIS/ES (%) PS/ES (%)
NEWLY LAUNCHED/TOTAL TRANSACTIONS COMPLETED/TOTAL TRANSACTIONS
TOTAL LAUNCHES/TOTAL TRANSACTIONS
Residential market for Gems
Figure 26: Number of residential transactions by price range for Gems
(Q1 2014) (NAPIC, 2014).
Figure 27: Number of residential transactions by house type for Gems
(Q1 2014) (NAPIC, 2014).
31CYF.A8/10.14
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
(A) 0 -50,000
(B) 50,001- 100,000
(C)100,001 -150,000
(D)150,001 -200,000
(E)200,001 -250,000
(F)250,001 -300,000
(G)300,001 -400,000
(H)400,001 -500,000
(I) 500,001-
1,000,000
(J)1,000,001- ABOVE
WEIG
HTA
GE (%
)N
UM
BER
OF
TRA
NSA
CTI
ON
S
PRICE RANGE (RM)
Q1 2013 Q4 2013 Q1 2014 W (Q1 2013) W (Q4 2013) W (Q1 2014)
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
WEIG
HTA
GE (%
)NU
MB
ER O
F TR
AN
SAC
TIO
NS
HOUSE TYPE
Q1 2013 Q4 2013 Q1 2014 W (Q1 2013) W (Q4 2013) W (Q1 2014)
Residential market for Gems
Figure 28: Residential average price per transaction by house type for Gems
(RM in million) (Q1 2014) (NAPIC, 2014).
Distribution for the value of transactions in northern territories was quite balanced with
slight skewness to the right, which placed minor emphasis on lower price tags of RM
200,000 and below. The most transacted price range was RM 50,001 – 100,000
(17.33%) in Q1 2014, followed by RM 100,001 – 150,000 (13.88%), and RM 150,001
– 200,000 (12.35%). There was a redistribution of weightage from higher price range
of RM 200,001 – RM 500,000, to lower price range of RM 50,001 – RM 200,000 in
Q1 2014. However, transactions above RM 500,001 were resilient.
The most preferred house type in Gems was terrace houses which made up close to
32% of the total transactions in Q1 2014. In addition, there was a high preference for
condominiums and apartments which represent 11% of the total transactions. Single-
storey semi-detached, flats, and low-cost houses each made up 10% of Gems’ Q1 2014
transaction market. All of the other house types were less than 10% each. Number of
transactions for all strata properties was less than 27%.
Generally, almost all house types recorded positive YOY changes for average price per
transaction except for housing classified under others. When compared with QOQ
changes, the rate of increment seemed to be consolidating in the near term.
32CYF.A8/10.14
0.12 0.16
0.450.24
0.650.88
0.60
0.20
0.490.22
0.08 0.08
1.32
-100.00
-50.00
0.00
50.00
100.00
150.00
200.00
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
CH
AN
GES (%
)A
VER
AG
E P
RIC
E P
ER T
RA
NSA
CTI
ON
(R
M I
N M
ILLI
ON
)
HOUSE TYPE
Q1 2013 Q4 2013 Q1 2014 YOY (%) QOQ (%)
Residential market for Gems
Figure 29: Average gross rental yield of Residential Properties in Penang
(2013) (JPPH, 2014).
33
Figure 30: Average gross rental yield of Landed Residential Properties in
Kedah (2013) (JPPH, 2014).
CYF.A8/10.14
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
SINGLE-STOREY TERRACED (%)
DOUBLE-STOREY TERRACED (%)
SINGLE-STOREY SEMI-DETACHED (%)
CONDOMINIUMS (%)
1.91
1.98
3.82
12.00
AVERAGE GROSS RENTAL YIELD (%)
4.60
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
KEDAH
GR
OSS
REN
TAL
YIE
LD (
%)
AREA
UPPER CASE (%) LOWER CASE (%) AVERAGE (%)
Residential market for Gems
Gross Rental Yield
It was observed that the average gross rental yield for Penang was higher for the
strata segment compared to the landed sector. Whereas within the landed
property segment, single-storey semi-detached houses recorded a higher
average gross rental yield compared to terraced houses.
Average gross rental yields for landed properties in Kedah and Perlis were
noticed to be higher than Penang. This may be attributed to the faster
appreciation rate of house prices in Penang compared to the other 2 states in
recent times; in which the incremental in rental yields has not caught up with
the appreciation rate of house prices. While single-storey terraced houses in
Perlis had a higher average gross rental yield than semi-detached houses.
34CYF.A8/10.14
Figure 31: Average gross rental yield of Residential Properties in Perlis
(2013) (JPPH, 2014).
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00
SINGLE-STOREY TERRACED (%)
SEMI-DETACHED (%)
3.53
2.67
AVERAGE GROSS RENTAL YIELD (%)
Residential market in Penang
Figure 32: Number of residential transactions by price range in Penang
(Q1 2014) (NAPIC, 2014).
Figure 33: Number of residential transactions by house type in Penang
(Q1 2014) (NAPIC, 2014).
35CYF.A8/10.14
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
(A) 0 -50,000
(B) 50,001- 100,000
(C)100,001 -150,000
(D)150,001 -200,000
(E)200,001 -250,000
(F)250,001 -300,000
(G)300,001 -400,000
(H)400,001 -500,000
(I)500,001 -1,000,000
(J)1,000,001- ABOVE
WEIG
HTA
GE (%
)N
UM
BER
OF
TRA
NSA
CTI
ON
S
PRICE RANGE (RM)
Q1 2013 Q4 2013 Q1 2014 W (Q1 2013) W (Q4 2013) W (Q1 2014)
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
WEIG
HTA
GE (%
)NU
MB
ER O
F TR
AN
SAC
TIO
NS
HOUSE TYPE
Q1 2013 Q4 2013 Q1 2014 W (Q1 2013) W (Q4 2013) W (Q1 2014)
Residential market in Penang
Figure 34: Residential average price per transaction by house type in Penang
(RM in million) (Q1 2014) (NAPIC, 2014).
In this finale, the number of transactions for Gems will be further broken down into individual
states; mainly Penang, Kedah, and Perlis.
Penang
The highest number of transactions was recorded in the price range of RM 500,001 – 1,000,000;
which accounts for 18% of the total transactions in Penang. The second was RM 50,001 –
100,000 at 14%. Mid-price range of RM 300,001 – 400,000 was at third with 12%. The price
range of RM 100,001 – 150,000 came in at 4th with 11%. As for other categories, every single
one of these price range has less than 10% each from the total transactions in Penang. In previous
quarters, it was noticed that the price range was slightly skewed to the left, which put more
emphasis on upper-mid price range. However, in Q1 2014; this trend was reversed, which put
more weightage on lower price range.
The most preferred house type in Penang was terrace houses which made up more than 30% of
the total transactions in Q1 2014. This was followed by condominiums and apartments which
represents 19% of the total transactions. Flats were third with 18%. All of the other house types
were less than 10% each. Number of transactions for all strata properties was capped at 44%.
Generally, almost all house types recorded positive YOY changes for average price per
transactions. Some of the biggest advancers were cluster and detached houses. QOQ, half of the
house types recorded positive growth. One of the notable gainer was cluster houses. However,
when compared with QOQ changes, the rate of increment seems to be slowing down in the near
term for all house types except for cluster houses.36
0.30 0.21 0.51 0.330.79
1.27
0.61
0.200.52 0.22 0.10
0.08
1.89
-100.00
0.00
100.00
200.00
300.00
400.00
500.00
600.00
700.00
800.00
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
CH
AN
GES (%
)A
VER
AG
E P
RIC
E P
ER T
RA
NSA
CTI
ON
(R
M I
N M
ILLI
ON
)
HOUSE TYPE
Q1 2013 Q4 2013 Q1 2014 YOY (%) QOQ (%)
CYF.A8/10.14
Residential market in Kedah
Figure 35: Number of residential transactions by price range in Kedah
(Q1 2014) (NAPIC, 2014).
Figure 36: Number of residential transactions by house type in Kedah
(Q1 2014) (NAPIC, 2014).
37CYF.A8/10.14
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
(A) 0 -50,000
(B) 50,001- 100,000
(C)100,001 -150,000
(D)150,001 -200,000
(E)200,001 -250,000
(F)250,001 -300,000
(G)300,001 -400,000
(H)400,001 -500,000
(I) 500,001-
1,000,000
(J)1,000,001- ABOVE
WEIG
HTA
GE (%
)N
UM
BER
OF
TRA
NSA
CTI
ON
S
PRICE RANGE (RM)
Q1 2013 Q4 2013 Q1 2014 W (Q1 2013) W (Q4 2013) W (Q1 2014)
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
40.00
45.00
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
WEIG
HTA
GE (%
)N
UM
BER
OF
TRA
NSA
CTI
ON
S
HOUSE TYPE
Q1 2013 Q4 2013 Q1 2014 W (Q1 2013) W (Q4 2013) W (Q1 2014)
Residential market in Kedah
Figure 37: Residential average price per transaction by house type in Kedah
(RM in million) (Q1 2014) (NAPIC, 2014).
Kedah
Most transactions in this state was concentrated within the price range of RM
200,000 and below (77%); with the most under RM 50,001 – 100,000 (23%). Other
categories were less significant. As such, the price range was somewhat skewed to
the right, which put more emphasis on lower price range.
Unlike Penang, landed properties were dominant in the state of Kedah. The most
transacted house type in Kedah was single storey terrace houses (25%), followed
by low-cost and single storey semi-detached houses (20% each). Within the state,
there was an enlarged appetite for single storey terrace, single storey semi-
detached, and low-cost houses.
YOY changes for average price per transactions were mixed. Some of the biggest
advancers were vacant plots, flats, and low-cost houses. QOQ, all house types
recorded positive growth except for town houses, flats, and low-cost flats. None of
the gainers recorded outstanding growth. When compared with QOQ changes, the
rate of change seems to be subdued in the near term for all house types.
38CYF.A8/10.14
0.06 0.12 0.22 0.21 0.33 0.310.17
0.000.18 0.11 0.08 0.03 0.00
-150.00
-100.00
-50.00
0.00
50.00
100.00
150.00
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
CH
AN
GES (%
)A
VER
AG
E P
RIC
E P
ER T
RA
NSA
CTI
ON
(R
M I
N M
ILLI
ON
)
HOUSE TYPE
Q1 2013 Q4 2013 Q1 2014 YOY (%) QOQ (%)
Residential market in Perlis
Figure 38: Number of residential transactions by price range in Perlis
(Q1 2014) (NAPIC, 2014).
Figure 39: Number of residential transactions by house type in Perlis
(Q1 2014) (NAPIC, 2014).
39CYF.A8/10.14
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
40.00
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
(A) 0 -50,000
(B) 50,001- 100,000
(C)100,001 -150,000
(D)150,001 -200,000
(E)200,001 -250,000
(F)250,001 -300,000
(G)300,001 -400,000
(H)400,001 -500,000
(I) 500,001-
1,000,000
(J)1,000,001- ABOVE
WEIG
HTA
GE (%
)N
UM
BER
OF
TRA
NSA
CTI
ON
S
PRICE RANGE (RM)
Q1 2013 Q4 2013 Q1 2014 W (Q1 2013) W (Q4 2013) W (Q1 2014)
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
WEIG
HTA
GE (%
)NU
MB
ER O
F TR
AN
SAC
TIO
NS
HOUSE TYPE
Q1 2013 Q4 2013 Q1 2014 W (Q1 2013) W (Q4 2013) W (Q1 2014)
Residential market in Perlis
Figure 40: Residential average price per transaction by house type in Perlis
(RM in million) (Q1 2014) (NAPIC, 2014).
Perlis
Similar to Penang and Kedah, price concentration for Perlis was within the lower to
middle ranges. Distribution of the value of transactions within Perlis was focused
on the range of RM 400,000 and below (97%). The shape of the entire distribution
was somewhat skewed to the right. There was a weightage redistribution from the
range of RM 400,001 – 500,000 to RM 150,001 – 200,000 in Q1 2014.
The most preferred house type in Perlis was single storey terrace houses which
made up close to 30% of the total transactions in Q1 2014. This was followed by
single storey semi-detached which represents 20% of the total transactions. Low-
cost houses were third at 17%. Vacant plots and 2 – 3 semi-detached houses each
account for 10% respectively. All of the other house types were less than 10% each.
Number of transactions for all strata properties was nil in Q1 2014.
Generally, YOY changes for average price per transactions were positive for all
house types. Notable advancers include cluster, low-cost, and 2 – 3 storey terrace
houses. However, when compared with QOQ changes, the rate of increment seems
to be diminishing in the near term.
40CYF.A8/10.14
0.06 0.15 0.28 0.26 0.36 0.32 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.19
-150.00
-100.00
-50.00
0.00
50.00
100.00
150.00
200.00
250.00
300.00
350.00
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
CH
AN
GES (%
)A
VER
AG
E P
RIC
E P
ER T
RA
NSA
CTI
ON
(R
M I
N M
ILLI
ON
)
HOUSE TYPE
Q1 2013 Q4 2013 Q1 2014 YOY (%) QOQ (%)
References
Department of Statistics Malaysia. (2014) Statistical Releases, [Online],
Available: http://www.statistics.gov.my/portal/index.php?option=
com_content&view=article&id=472&Itemid=111&lang=en&negeri=Malaysia
[15 Sep 2014].
JPPH. (2014) Property Market Report 2013, Putrajaya: Valuation and Property
Services Department.
NAPIC. (2014) Key Statistics, [Online], Available:
http://napic.jpph.gov.my/portal [15 Sep 2014].
41CYF.A8/10.14
Contact us
42
OFFICE EMAIL TELEPHONE
HQ (KL) [email protected] 603 26980911
Petaling Jaya [email protected] 603 78806542
Subang Jaya [email protected] 603 56319668
Klang [email protected] 603 33420193603 33420182
Ipoh [email protected] 605 2532804605 2413888
Seremban [email protected] 606 6333211
Melaka [email protected] 606 2860017606 2840017
Penang [email protected] 604 2638093604 2612032
Johor Bahru [email protected] 607 3863791607 3863795
Kuantan [email protected] 609 5157100
Kuching [email protected] 6082 235236
Kota Kinabalu [email protected] 6088 266520
CYF.A8/10.14
International Affiliations
43
Country Affiliates
Australia
Corporate Office – SydneyNew South Wales – Sydney
Queensland –BrisbaneVictoria - Melbourne
South Australia – Kent TownTasmania – Hobart
Western Australia – South PerthNorthern Territory – Parap
Austria DMH Vienna
Belgium Activia Belgium SA
Czech Republic Huber Holdings Prag s.r.o
Fiji Raine & Horne Fiji
Hong Kong Raine & Horne Projects Hong Kong
Hungary Dr. Max Huber Kft.
India Arora & Associates Realty Ltd.
Italy GC International S.R.L.
JapanKiuchi Property Counselors & Valuers
Inc
United Kingdom Raine & Horne Crossgates
UAE Raine & Horne Dubai
Vanuatu Raine & Horne Vanuatu
CYF.A8/10.14
Raine & Horne International Zaki + Partnerswww.raineandhorne.com.my
Perpetual 99, Jalan Raja Muda Abdul Aziz, 50300 Kuala Lumpur
Tel: 03-2698 0911 Fax: 03-2691 1959 Email: [email protected]
Company No. 99440-T, VE (1) 0067
44
