ABSTRACT
The property is a unique product that cannot be contrasted with other commercial products due to pricing conditions. Property price determination is one of the crucial aspects of property development activities because of the profit margin made by the developer and the purchasing preferences. This study attempts to extend the literature that has largely focused on factors of housing prices in developed markets and provided recent evidence of housing price determinants in two countries (i.e., Indonesia and Malaysia). Thus, this study examines the factors affecting housing prices in Jakarta Metropolitan Region and Greater Kuala Lumpur. A quantitative approach was used involving two countries, namely Indonesia and Malaysia. The data was collected using a survey questionnaire through purposive sampling. A total of 100 respondents (Indonesia) and 134 respondents (Malaysia) participated in this study. The data was analyzed using descriptive (frequency) and inferential statistics (chi-square test and multinomial regression). The results indicated that housing location, property funding, and health have a significant effect on residential property prices in Indonesia. Besides that, the results displayed that housing physical design, home design and construction, developer and real estate products, development concepts, housing location, property funding, social status, health, law provisions, and external factors do not affect residential property price in Malaysia. Despite being neighbors, Indonesia and Malaysia have distinct economic and landscape characteristics. Furthermore, considering Indonesia has a higher number of Covid-19 cases than Malaysia, significant information on how the pandemic has affected the demand, cost, and pricing of residential housing in Jakarta and Kuala Lumpur will be provided. The findings of this study will provide recommendations to investors, buyers, and policy about the residential housing industry's prospects for growth in emerging nations following the pandemic. © 2022 by the authors;licensee Growing Science, Canada.
ABSTRACT
Almost 38 % from Indonesian National Budget is spent heavily on economy and medical recoveries during Covid 19 Pandemic so government has reduced some spending including public housing project as part of infrastructure even though number of backlog is still higher. The possible solution to catch backlog is engaging private sectors to involve in the public housing project under the scheme of public private partnership (PPP). Nevertheless, some risks may expose to private sectors and it will have an impact to investment rate The risk impact to the investment rate will be explored alongside the effect from capital structure and investment valuation. If capital structure, investment valuation and risk have simultaneously impact investment rate, the possible mitigation risk strategy must be designed in advance with the support from the government. Those parameters must be managed properly in order to attract public housing project under PPP scheme. The research has used multiple regression with time series from 2009 until 2018, 10 years data with all samples taken from companies that listed in the Indonesian Stock Exchange (IDX) under the industry of property and construction. The independent variables consist of debt, debt to equity ratio, stock issuance, retained earnings, sales, opex, capex, discounted cash flow, sales volatility, material price volatility and operational risk volatility with IRR and ROE as dependent variables. The risks is measured by the concept adopted from Value at Risk which heavily counts on volatility as a quantitative method. The measurement of risk variables in other research has commonly used tools like analytic hierarchy process (AHP) while this study used risk volatility measurement with Value at Risk (VaR) tools. The research framework also align with risk return theory that accommodates risk factors into investment rate model simultaneously with capital structure and invesment valuation The designed hypothesis was capital structure, investment valuation and risk impact investment rate for public housing simultaneously. The findings has showed that business risk negatively impact investment rate while most of capital structure variables as well as investment valuation positively impact investment rate. Those three main variables influence IRR almost 50 percent by adjusted R squared, higher than ROE, which is influenced by 31.5 % from variables of capital structure, investment valuation and risk. By the risk analysis based on multiple regressions, it can be concluded that sales volatility, as a business risk predictor must be prioritized rather than material price volatility and operational cost volatility. The companies must be managing debt not too over levered, securing sales and managing business risk by diversifying streams of revenues and involving government to support with incentives, support and subsidy to minimize business risk. All initiatives will be taken to meet the average required investment rate, i.e. target ROE by 10 % and IRR by 14% as found from historical data of 2009-2018. Time period for this research only captured 10 years data from 2009 to 2018. Different and longer time frame may change the research findings. The next study can capture data which showed financial crisis like during 1997-1998 or property bubble/sluggish period, seeing the impact of those event as a risk phenomenon and analyzing the impact to investment rate in public housing project by conducting event study. Other methodology like mixed-method research to explore qualitative aspect could also enrich the findings for research improvement in the future. The paper has a significant contribution to make a financial policy in PPP for Public Housing between government and private sectors, the target of ROE can be set by minimum 10 % with target IRR by 14%. Besides that private sectors can discuss with government for securing property sales by receiving government guarantee, diversifying revenue by doing mixed used buildings and asking Viability Gap Fund (VGF) if actual IRR and ROE is still below the ta get as a last resort. Those efforts can be taken as part of risk mitigation to reduce business risk volatility as measured by this study. © 2020, Academy of Strategic Management Journal. All Rights Reserved