By Property Soul
nassim-talebIt was exciting to see Nassim Nicholas Taleb presenting “Antifragility: Gaining From Volatility, Stress And Disorder” in the open space outside National Library last Wednesday. Like a loyal fan longing to meet her idol, it made my day when I managed to get his autograph at the end of the session. (P.S. I hope that I can cheer my readers up the same way when I autograph my book.)
Taleb answered every question from the audience with a series of metaphors. One must have a comparable high level of imagination to follow his arguments.
I thoroughly enjoy reading his book, Antifragile: Things That Gain From Disorder. I agree with the author on almost every point he tries to drive home. Above all, I can easily apply his concepts in property investment which is, to a high extent, an antifragile game.
1. What kills make others stronger. 

“Those who perish contribute to the overall safety of others.”

Every plane crash improves aviation systems and brings passengers closer to safety. The 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami prompted the building of more sophisticated warning systems. The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster in 2011 resulted in the closure of nuclear power plants in countries all over the world.
The 1997 Asian financial crisis was a painful lesson that forced many Asian countries to build a safer banking system. The 2008 U.S. subprime crisis was a wake-up call for other governments to review high-risk lending practices and home mortgages in their own country.

“It is often the mistakes of others that benefit the rest of us – and, sadly, not them.”

In other words, someone has to fail for others to succeed.
2. What does not kill me kills others. 

“What did not kill me did not make me stronger, but spared me because I am stronger than others; but it killed others and the average population is now stronger because the weak are gone.”

The eight rounds of cooling measures might ‘spare’ you because you have a high credit score or you are buying for the first time. But these restrictions ‘kill’ others because, on top of the high stamp duties and low loan-to-value, they may fail the Total Debt Servicing Ratio (TDSR) and can’t borrow from banks.
These are buyers who sacrifice for the government’s determination ‘to ensure a stable and sustainable property market’. But after ‘the weak are gone’, the housing mortgage market ‘is now stronger’. If the property market is harmed by any negative market factor, Singapore will have less non-performing loans and negative equities.

“Someone paid a price for the system to improve.”

3. The more you have, the more fragile you are.

“Success brings an asymmetry: you now have a lot more to lose then to gain.”

Unlike an ordinary folk who can’t afford to buy any private property, when you have a big stake in properties, you are upset every time there is a new round of cooling measures. Similarly, if you are a highly-leveraged multiple property owner, you are more hard hit when the market tanks. You are hence fragile.
Markets go through the stages from recovery to boom, and from an inflating bubble to a total collapse. Wealthier countries are prone to make more severe mistakes and to fail more miserably because of higher unpredictability and fragility.

“When you become rich, the pain of losing your fortune exceeds the emotional gain of getting additional wealth, so you start living under continuous emotional threat.”

4. We can’t put all false predictors in jail.

“I find it profoundly unethical to talk without doing, without exposure to harm, without having one’s skin in the game, without having something at risk.”

We all like to listen to the so-called experts making predictions about the property market – the media love it; the audience love it. These ‘experts’ and their predictions are fragile because they are exposed to prediction errors. Honestly, who can tell what is going to happen in the future?
Below are the media predictions and the reality of the property market in the 2000s and 1990s, extracted from No B.S. Guide to Property Investment.
predictions
But they don’t have to pay a price for their mistakes. In fact, in our history no one has ever been convicted by law because their projection figures or forecast trends are far from reality. No one has ever paid a price for a prediction error.
We can’t stop people from asking for predictions. We can’t stop experts from making false predictions. But we can at least request the predictors to eat their own cooking and have their skin in the game.

“Never ask anyone for their opinion, forecast, or recommendation. Just ask them what they have – or don’t have – in their portfolio.”

5. It’s an unfair winner-take-all game.

“Almost everything contemporary has winner-take-all-effects.”

The privileged in our world all know how to play the antifragile game:

  • Keep the good and ditch the bad; cut the downside and keep the upside.
  • Ensure that they have more to gain then to lose.
  • Steal the options from others with all the upside and no downside to themselves.

Senior executives in banks and fund managers may have made terrible mistakes and lost more than they ever made. But they are still paid billions in compensations and commissions. The bankers and fund managers take all the upside, leaving the downside to customers and taxpayers.
New condominium projects are sold at record-high prices during new launches. Government sold the land, developers made their profits, and agents earned their commissions. When the market slows down, home buyers are left alone to face the music of falling prices, market oversupply, interest rate risk, etc. while they have no option but to continue paying the same record-high selling price in phases to the developers.
6. Beware of the agencies.
The marketers of overseas properties or investment opportunities can speak highly of the projects that they are marketing to potential buyers, though they themselves are not related, or not even familiar, with the owners and their businesses. They take the upside and make their commission. But when problems surface, they can’t do anything. Buyers are left to deal with all the downside.
Taleb calls this the ‘agency problem’:

“The manager of a business is not the true owner, so he follows a strategy that cosmetically seems to be sound, but in a hidden way benefits him and makes him antifragile at the expense (fragility) of the true owners or society. When he is right, he collects large benefits; when he is wrong, others pay the price.”

This article was first published at propertysoul.com

Subscribe
Notify of
3 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

李绳武被控藐视法庭获准上诉 撤销总检察署海外庭令

李绳武父亲李显扬,于今早在脸书贴文表示,新加坡上诉庭在昨日驳回高庭决定,允许李绳武上诉,以撤销总检察署的境外传召庭令。 他在贴文补充,“上诉庭的裁决,也印证了我们的信念,即绳武提出的严肃课题,值得认真探讨。“ 他相信,这是有史以来,上诉庭有机会在公开法庭探讨,在李绳武个案的情境下,我国法庭在国外是否具备司法权。 探讨是否具备海外司法权 新加坡总检察署指控,建国总理李光耀的孙子李绳武涉藐视法庭,并采取法律行动。 李绳武是在去年7月15日,在脸书贴文批评我国政府“好诉讼”,法庭制度“温顺”,被总检察署指控藐视法庭。 李绳武也拒绝撤下有关贴文。他曾指出,有关贴文只是设定为只供朋友圈浏览,不公开大众阅读,却还是引来三大媒体和总检察署的注意,令他对新加坡政府琐事必究的程度感到惊讶。“难道我在私人脸书上发布“煽动性”炫耀休假的照片,也会被对付?” 李绳武的代表律师在去年12月22日,提出申请以撤销有关在美国递交法律文件给当事人的庭令,但在今年3月26日,被高庭驳回。 李绳武代表律师提出理据,总检察署有必要证明,藐视法庭程序必须根据“成文法”提诉,或是基于成文法来执法。然而,在李绳武发布有关贴文期间,藐视法庭罪并没有成文法律可依据。 其二,即便能以成文法提出藐视法庭诉讼,总检察署错误援引高庭法(Supreme Court of…

无准证举办视讯会议聚会 法院裁定范国瀚有罪

新加坡法院今日裁定,社运份子范国瀚无准证举办集会,且拒绝签署口供,被判有罪。判刑日期被定在本月23日。 范国瀚也是社区行动网络(CAN)负责人、客工组织“情义之家”前执行董事。 他在2016年11月26日,在新民巷主办“公民抗命即社会运动”论坛,邀请香港“黄雨伞运动”中的学运领袖黄之锋,透过Skype与现场观众连线对谈交流。当时,范国瀚和主办人之一的Rachel Zeng认为对社会运动的健康讨论,并不会构成威胁,活动最后也平和地结束。 然而,范国瀚为此被控违反《公共秩序法》,该法要求有外国演讲者的活动,必须事先申请和得到警方许可。 警方告知范国瀚,即便是视讯集会也必须先申请准证。 在接受警方调查时,查案人员传召范国瀚问话,并在录完口供后,要求范国瀚确认签字。 范国瀚要求索取口供书的备份后,才肯签名。警方以口供书属于机密文件为由,拒绝他的要求,并表示,如果范国瀚不签名,可能会触犯法律。 根据我国法律,在公务人员的要求下、拒绝签名的违例者,可能面对长达3个月监禁或高达2500元罚款,或两者兼施。至于未经警方许可举办公开集会,则可被判处5千元罚款。 对于新加坡政府因为举办闭门视讯交流就起诉范国瀚的举动,黄之锋曾在脸书直批我国政府审查之举,“比中国大陆更离谱”,难以想象视讯会议办论坛也要经过警察审批。 “在私人空间进行闭门视讯交流,用逻辑来想也知属私人事务,质疑警方是否有提控之必要。 集会自由乃基本人权。但是在新加坡,公民为同一共识聚集却往往遭到政府的猜疑。集会只能在唯一地点进行,即便一人也能构成“非法集会”罪行。”…

精英制度忽略贫富差距复杂因素 严燕松冀扶持同胞携手共进

尽管并没有出现在国家信约、国歌中,但似乎精英治国(Meritocracy)被吹捧为治国的“金科玉律”。工人党阿裕尼集选区议员严燕松提醒,精英政治固然对于打击贪腐、裙带关系是很好的准则,但似乎对每个公民都以能力和成就角度看待,而分出次优等级。 他打个比方,对于小孩我们是否也要以精英制度来苛求他们?如果考了不好的成绩,就只能吃快熟面、睡小房间?但对于我们的社会却是:你赚的不多,你就活该拥有糟糕的生活条件。 对此严燕松提及贫富差距中的复杂因素,则就好比一些人起跑条件优越,提前20米、跑道畅通无阻、还有良师指导,但遗憾的是,有些人的起跑线却可能从后方10米开始。 他指出,工人党对新加坡的愿景是国人都能达成他们的梦想,透过有竞争力的本地公司、活力经济,国人能合力打造这个家园。同时,一个有问责制的健全机制,比任何政党都更能持久。 要实现这愿景,就必须确保家庭能抵御生活中的风暴、校园能让学生为生存做好准备;社会安全网也能确保那些不慎跌倒的人,能够再次站起。 然而精英制度不看这些复杂因素,仅强调个人成就。“但我们是一个国家,不是一家企业。我们是同胞们的守护者。我们需要扶助彼此走完赛道。” 严燕松是在新加坡透视论坛,为“展望2030年新加坡政治”的对话会上,这么指出。 受邀嘉宾也包括卫生部兼通讯及新闻部高级政务部长普杰立医生,以及前进党非选区议员潘群勤。 严燕松也强调,目前面对的问题尤为复杂,需要各界的集思广益,而不是比赛谁能更快提出好主意,异议人士也不该被指责,“所有利益相关者应该合作而不是竞争,以找到应对挑战的最佳解决方案。” 普杰立:两党制由国人决定 回溯2011年,新加坡总理李显龙,曾表示两党制在新加坡根本行不通。治国最关键的是人才,唯有让A队有最大的成功机会,才能保障国家的前途,不能为了反对党所说的“买保险”,而去削弱A队。 对此,有与会者在会上抛出质问,从去年选举可见,人民希望看到更多反对党声音,行动党是否支持这种观点。…

Newsbites – Red Dot gets a stopper, cleaning firms get the books, telcos get fined

Authorities say “no” to pro-family event at Padang The Ministry of Social…