I beg to differ. Really. There is a lot of misconception about no deposit.
Yes, we do attract 'financially' bad tenants, but we also attract financially stable tenants. And we perform credit checking on every transaction, which means if tenants that are financially bad, they won't be accepted to rent through SPEEDHOME.
Put yourself in the shoe of tenant - even if you were able to pay deposit, would you like NOT to pay deposit if there is an option?
Put yourself in the shoe of tenant - you have just graduated, your saving in bank is low, unable to pay deposit, but does that mean you are financially bad?
Put yourself in the shoe of a property buyer - is downpayment hard? And if the prop developers gives 0 downpayment - would it suddenly become super easy to own a house? (that happened in 2009-ish, and that's why a lot of people 'got rich' with it). Same logic for 0 deposit for renting a house.
I presume you would understand the pain the tenant goes through. And understand that there tons of upside for owners to gain through enlarged tenant pool of choices, speedier because your neighbours want deposit, and you get insurance protection.
We should objectively analyse the situation, not just looking at one aspect of the situation without looking at other opportunities that arise from that.
As much as I would like to support speedrent (especially when game changer tenant act is introduced), not that apple to apple comparison with developer giving low dp for property purchase. End of the day it is banks who will shoulder the risk if purchasers couldn't pay the installment, and not developer.
Property Developer in Malaysia is pampered too much by Government. Even agriculture which is critical industry does not receive so much incentive compared to property.