Mmm, plenty of illogical arguments in the article. It is either the product of an uneducated, confused mind, or intentionally dishonest. Considering his status, I'm guessing the latter is true.

Cooling measures are good for property investors and bad for developers. The purpose of cooling measures is to avoid or modulate the expected crash part of an ordinary property cycle. Crashes are very painful for individual homeowners and investors, and drastically life-changing.

Most of the property cycle models adduced in this forum and elsewhere do not take into account government intervention to stop the positive feedback of higher prices that will ultimately always end in a crash.

I've always maintained that with proper policies, BNM may be able to cause stagnation instead of a crash.

Developers on the other hand who are selling properties at so called "future prices" have an incentive to maintain the appearance that future prices are going to be higher. Without that appearance, they stand to lose out against sub-sale properties selling at a lower price.

Again, just goes to show, the property market is all about smoke and mirrors. Appearances and sentiment. The fundamentals don't matter. Why should they?