What do you guys think about Jaypee Greens Wishtown - NOIDA? Is this a good time to buy? Is Wishtown a good investment?

Cheers! :)
Read more
Reply
7924 Replies
Sort by :Filter by :
  • Originally Posted by MANOJa
    Can u explain this a commons's man language ?

    I am not as learned as u .

    Manoja sir, no disrespect, but it is difficult to simplify beyond a point. Most loans do actually have general charge on assets. Say you buy a car on a loan. It's security is firstly the car, but then also your general assets. If the car has an accident and is condemned, the lender can come after your other assets to recover the loan. This is what a general charge is. What is true of loans to individuals is also true of loans to companies ( in some loan agreements the words "general charge" are explicitly written. It does create some conflict of interest with lenders who hold primary, specific charge, which is why it is a can of worms).

    In any case, my last post on the subject. I think the JP debt situation is at a stage where events will happen very fast and it is better to watch them rather than engage in futile academic discussions to prove who has a higher IQ.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by pkgandhi
    Boss I understand all of that . what you don't seem to understand is that firstly X is based on an assumption of where land can be sold. The real value might be 0.5x or even lower in a fire sale. Secondly, there are loans that JP has taken that are secured not by first charge on specific assets but a general charge on all assets of the firm. That will open another can of worms but I am done for now.


    Normal practice is that banks assure a value of 1.2x at the time of mortgage (x being specific working capital) - which over time goes to 2-3-4x. I remember 1.2x being the figure for banks taking mortgage on RE assets in Jaypee many years ago - mostly land.

    General charge over ALL ASSETS of Jaypee is a new one - which I don't know about. Can you explain this??
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by pkgandhi
    Manoja sir, no disrespect, but it is difficult to simplify beyond a point. Most loans do actually have general charge on assets. Say you buy a car on a loan. It's security is firstly the car, but then also your general assets. If the car has an accident and is condemned, the lender can come after your other assets to recover the loan. This is what a general charge is. What is true of loans to individuals is also true of loans to companies ( in some loan agreements the words "general charge" are explicitly written. It does create some conflict of interest with lenders who hold primary, specific charge, which is why it is a can of worms).

    In any case, my last post on the subject. I think the JP debt situation is at a stage where events will happen very fast and it is better to watch them rather than engage in futile academic discussions to prove who has a higher IQ.


    Further simplified say there is a dead deer. The Lion will have the First charge on the meat. When the lion is full then the Hyena will go next (second charge). Followed by Vultures who will be normal creditors.

    General Charge means if the primary asset against which the loan is provided does not fetch the full amount of dues then bank can look at other assets.

    Now say the car is written off the bank cannot force you to sell your furniture or house if you have given first charge to other entities. But they will go before other normal creditors.

    Adding a bit more.

    There is something called Holding and Subsidiaries. Charges cannot spill outside 1 subsidiary to another subsidiary. but can travel up the chain to Holding and Its directors personal liability.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by pkgandhi
    Manoja sir, no disrespect, but it is difficult to simplify beyond a point. Most loans do actually have general charge on assets. Say you buy a car on a loan. It's security is firstly the car, but then also your general assets. If the car has an accident and is condemned, the lender can come after your other assets to recover the loan. This is what a general charge is. What is true of loans to individuals is also true of loans to companies ( in some loan agreements the words "general charge" are explicitly written. It does create some conflict of interest with lenders who hold primary, specific charge, which is why it is a can of worms).

    In any case, my last post on the subject. I think the JP debt situation is at a stage where events will happen very fast and it is better to watch them rather than engage in futile academic discussions to prove who has a higher IQ.


    We need text which everybody can understand . No disrespect meant to anybody, we r looking to cater primarily to the common man & if u can only write for the elite, maybe, we need to have a fresh look at u .

    I have ample of reports against so many members who just fly high and their posts r maybe comprehensible to a few select gathering .

    We want language which all can understand . I cannot set a standard for this, but i can probably consider myself as a standard here .
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by dineshsays
    Normal practice is that banks assure a value of 1.2x at the time of mortgage (x being specific working capital) - which over time goes to 2-3-4x. I remember 1.2x being the figure for banks taking mortgage on RE assets in Jaypee many years ago - mostly land.

    General charge over ALL ASSETS of Jaypee is a new one - which I don't know about. Can you explain this??


    General charge is not worth talking about. The creditors always take it to court and the court will put you next to normal creditors as it is too vague. Basically not worth the ink it is written with but works if other creditors are small time and don't want to take you to court. This is bankruptcy situation. If you can still service your debts then it would be like normal debt owed to creditors.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by MANOJa
    We need text which everybody can understand .

    I have ample of reports against so many members who just fly high and their posts r maybe comprehensible to a few select gathering .

    We want language which a common man can understand . I cannot set a standard for this, but i can probably consider myself as a standard here .

    It's your call Manoja sir, but in my opinion, if the standard of comprehensibility for what is a technical topic is reduced to the lowest common denominator, then you will have threads everyone can understand, but no one finds useful.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by pkgandhi
    It's your call Manoja sir, but in my opinion, if the standard of comprehensibility for what is a technical topic is reduced to the lowest common denominator, then you will have threads everyone can understand, but no one finds useful.


    ....i am not looking to segregate threads - Threads for the elite or for the rest .

    I hope u get my point . The Forum is meant for everybody, elite, meant for middle class, lower middle class and maybe beyond that .

    Please don't consider my post specific to u what u write .

    We r looking to implement it gradually & i thought u were a good example to initiate this in the forum .
    CommentQuote
  • It is a simple topic made exceedingly complicated and technical by introducing needless financial terms and angles - most of which is speculation, laced with equal doses of bashing and rumour/fear mongering and has no bearing to the actual situation on the ground or even what readers on this forum want to understand or care about.

    If at all a relevant question for this REAL ESTATE FORUM simply is will Wish town be delivered yes or no?

    If yes why, if not why not. Put in your thoughts - which is theory and conjecture to start with - then leave it to events to unfold and let people see for themselves.

    Getting turned on by financial jargon and ridiculing people for not appreciating exact nuances, going on and on about one's abilities as a doomsday predictor is a first ever I am seeing on the forum.

    Ofcourse things can be simplified if one wants to.
    CommentQuote
  • Let me make it very clear . I am not taking any sides here and i do respect all views here .

    My point is that everybody should understand what u guys r trying to say .




    Originally Posted by MANOJa
    ....i am not looking to segregate threads - Threads for the elite or for the rest .

    I hope u get my point . The Forum is meant for everybody, elite, meant for middle class, lower middle class and maybe beyond that .

    Please don't consider my post specific to u what u write .

    We r looking to implement it gradually & i thought u were a good example to initiate this in the forum .


    Originally Posted by dineshsays
    It is a simple topic made exceedingly complicated and technical by introducing needless financial terms and angles - most of which is speculation, laced with equal doses of bashing and rumour/fear mongering and has no bearing to the actual situation on the ground or even what readers on this forum want to understand or care about.

    If at all a relevant question for this REAL ESTATE FORUM simply is will Wish town be delivered yes or no?

    If yes why, if not why not. Put in your thoughts - which is theory and conjecture to start with - then leave it to events to unfold and let people see for themselves.

    Getting turned on by financial jargon and ridiculing people for not appreciating exact nuances, going on and on about one's abilities as a doomsday predictor is a first ever I am seeing on the forum.

    Ofcourse things can be simplified if one wants to.


    Originally Posted by pkgandhi
    It's your call Manoja sir, but in my opinion, if the standard of comprehensibility for what is a technical topic is reduced to the lowest common denominator, then you will have threads everyone can understand, but no one finds useful.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by MANOJa
    ....i am not looking to segregate threads - Threads for the elite or for the rest .

    I hope u get my point . The Forum is meant for everybody, elite, meant for middle class, lower middle class and maybe beyond that .

    Please don't consider my post specific to u what u write .

    We r looking to implement it gradually & i thought u were a good example to initiate this in the forum .


    Manoja sir, I get your point, but the distinction i see is not based on elite vs middle class vs lower middle class etc, but rather based on familiarity with technical subjects when having technical discussions.

    For example, dineshsays sir is clearly from elite class and I am not, but even he has admitted his technical knowledge about some of the topics we were discussing is limited. So, I request you not to frame the question in terms of distinction of class, when it is more a matter of using technical language vs not ( my technical knowledge in many fields is zero too and I feel it would be unfair of me to ask others not to have a technical discussion just because I can't understand it). But I do understand your point that this is a general RE forum, not one on bankruptcy law.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by pkgandhi
    Manoja sir, I get your point, but the distinction i see is not based on elite vs middle class vs lower middle class etc, but rather based on familiarity with technical subjects when having technical discussions.

    For example, dineshsays sir is clearly from elite class and I am not, but even he has admitted his technical knowledge about some of the topics we were discussing is limited. So, I request you not to frame the question in terms of distinction of class, when it is more a matter of using technical language vs not ( my technical knowledge in many fields is zero too and I feel it would be unfair of me to ask others not to have a technical discussion just because I can't understand it). But I do understand your point that this is a general RE forum, not one on bankruptcy law.


    Everybody doesn't understand these technical terms, so keep the language simple .

    I hope this is clear enough .


    ............also, i am increasingly seeing a pattern and motive in posts of some members and i sense external interests somewhere . I hope these guys get my point .
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by MANOJa
    Everybody doesn't understand these technical terms, so keep the language simple .

    I hope this is clear enough .


    ............also, i am increasingly seeing a pattern and motive in posts of some members and i sense external interests somewhere . I hope these guys get my point .


    Manoja sir, I get the point on the use of simple language, but I don't get what you mean by patterns and motives of some members and what kind of external interests you are seeing.

    If this is directed at me, let me clarify that I have found the archives of this forum useful, I am interested in and have investments in real estate in India and am currently in a situation where I have more free time on hand than I have had in the past and will have starting in the near future. I thrive on challenges and debates and am using part of my downtime to sharpen my understanding of RE investing in India. I noticed that forum has a large number of posters who have been trying to pump up a particular builder which seemed to be in dire straits. I took it upon myself as an intellectual challenge to unearth what the truth really was. If you have found any patterns and motives in my posts, the only interest has been to uncover the truth and post it for the benefit of the disinterested readers who may not have the analytical skills and time I currently have on hand, especially since I felt there were a lot of vested interests who are painting an overly optimistic picture, which was at odds with reality. I consider this public service in return for what I have learnt from the excellent forum archives.

    Since you have raised the doubts in response to my posts and your opinion carries weight as a moderator, I feel the insinuation has the effect of undermining my credibility and request you to please clarify what exactly you meant. If you think I have any questionable external interests other than what I have stated above, please let me know and I will be happy to stop posting here.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by dineshsays
    It is a simple topic made exceedingly complicated and technical by introducing needless financial terms and angles - most of which is speculation, laced with equal doses of bashing and rumour/fear mongering and has no bearing to the actual situation on the ground or even what readers on this forum want to understand or care about.

    If at all a relevant question for this REAL ESTATE FORUM simply is will Wish town be delivered yes or no?

    If yes why, if not why not. Put in your thoughts - which is theory and conjecture to start with - then leave it to events to unfold and let people see for themselves.

    Getting turned on by financial jargon and ridiculing people for not appreciating exact nuances, going on and on about one's abilities as a doomsday predictor is a first ever I am seeing on the forum.

    Ofcourse things can be simplified if one wants to.


    I agree and would like to apologize if things got complicated. It's just that terms were being thrown around without understanding the full meaning and over complicating the situation. You cannot clarify without going into cause and effect of the situation. There are checks and balances for everything along the way.

    Also what is written and what can be enforced are 2 different things. I can write anything on a piece of paper but I cannot always enforce it.
    CommentQuote
  • We are receiving reports against several members that they are a part of a group who is looking to discredit some Builders or one Builder . We are also receiving complaints against some other members who could be a part of portraying a particular Builder in positive health, despite all the problems of that particular Builder .

    Since, we have several such complaints, we are bound to look for such lobbies and anti-lobbies and if they do exit, we need to disband them .

    I am not looking to undermine your credibility or the credibility of anybody else . I do often read what u write and i do enjoy it, though as i said earlier, when i put on my common's man hat, most of what u post bounces off my head .

    My motive of my referred post is very simple - If we have lobbies and anti-lobbies meant for purposes which are against the rules, i would make sure that these groups and any posts with any external motivations are taken off the forum .

    So my quoted comment is for anybody who is a part of such lobbies and i hope that they get my point .


    Originally Posted by pkgandhi
    Manoja sir, I get the point on the use of simple language, but I don't get what you mean by patterns and motives of some members and what kind of external interests you are seeing.

    If this is directed at me, let me clarify that I have found the archives of this forum useful, I am interested in and have investments in real estate in India and am currently in a situation where I have more free time on hand than I have had in the past and will have starting in the near future. I thrive on challenges and debates and am using part of my downtime to sharpen my understanding of RE investing in India. I noticed that forum has a large number of posters who have been trying to pump up a particular builder which seemed to be in dire straits. I took it upon myself as an intellectual challenge to unearth what the truth really was. If you have found any patterns and motives in my posts, the only interest has been to uncover the truth and post it for the benefit of the disinterested readers who may not have the analytical skills and time I currently have on hand, especially since I felt there were a lot of vested interests who are painting an overly optimistic picture, which was at odds with reality. I consider this public service in return for what I have learnt from the excellent forum archives.

    Since you have raised the doubts in response to my posts and your opinion carries weight as a moderator, I feel the insinuation has the effect of undermining my credibility and request you to please clarify what exactly you meant. If you think I have any questionable external interests other than what I have stated above, please let me know and I will be happy to stop posting here.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by Imperialnoid
    I agree and would like to apologize if things got complicated. It's just that terms were being thrown around without understanding the full meaning and over complicating the situation. You cannot clarify without going into cause and effect of the situation. There are checks and balances for everything along the way.

    Also what is written and what can be enforced are 2 different things. I can write anything on a piece of paper but I cannot always enforce it.

    Bro - my post does not make any reference to you. You have been posting for years and only tried to clarify matters here.

    However a certain Nobel Laureate in doomsday prediction and the resident financial genius of this forum may not be beyond purview.

    I learnt a new definition of bankruptcy yesterday - you fail to pay a few loans and therefore you are bankrupt. Can there ever be a better definition. I hope Harvard professors are reading in.

    I am fairly certain that Imperial Court is due for handover shortly and I wish you the best.
    CommentQuote