There's always a Birkin in the closet, but never a Playstation on the floor.

I'm talking about showflats, and now is an appropriate time, with a slew of new launches like Canberra Crescent Residences, River Green, Promenade Peak, etc., all coming up.

You probably know showflats present an over-optimistic view of the units. But there's still a lingering belief for many, deep down, that with enough renovations/furnishing, they really could have a home like that.

That's why I've been trying, for some time, to find the people who design these showflats. There are definitely specialist firms out there, like D'Perception Ritz and Tong Hai Yang Construction, who are known specialists and fairly direct about their methods.  But ask them about how much it costs, and you're more likely to get a murder confession than a straight answer.

Custom carpentry that's designer-inspired (i.e., doesn't come with the unit)? Designer window treatments? Under-sized and over-designed sofas? Lighting fixtures that look like they were hand-forged by the Gods of Valhalla? Odds are the bill reaches over five digits before you've even left the living room; and that's without counting the wine and shoes, and expensive bags.

Then there's what showflats reveal about buyer demographics

Just about every showflat emphasises the wardrobe in the bedroom, and the places to put your designer bags and shoes. 

But how often have you seen a showflat glamourise a man-cave with a PS5, a stack of priceless vintage consoles, and an electric guitar and foosball table wedged into a junior master suite?

(And if they used a scented candle, I like to think it would be a smell that's somewhere between Cheeto dust and Fabreeze)

But this isn't without reason; and it's because designers and developers know that quite often the wife/mother/girlfriend may hold the final veto. It may not be true all the time, but some hidden, calculative researcher has determined it's true often enough.

Then there's the tendency to create a nursery for any condo that has "family-oriented" in the marketing campaign. Now, practically speaking, not a lot of homeowners build full-on nursery rooms: rainbow-unicorn wallpaper and castle-shaped beds are expensive, and children are usually embarrassed by them by the time they're 13 (if not younger).

So why not just have generic children's rooms, like most actual homeowners will set up? The somewhat manipulative answer is that, if the three-bedder has a nursery, it might remind you that someday you may have a child, or another one; so maybe then you'll settle on the three-bedder instead of that "compact two-bedder."

Then there's the way you tend to enter a showflat via the balcony, like some kind of lost pigeon. No showflat I've visited has ever had us enter via the actual front door, which you'd think is an important consideration. But I suppose no one ever looks at a 1.2 metre wide front entrance and decides "wow, I'll sign the OTP now." 

The balcony/living frontage is the most impressive, so that's where we step in, even though in reality, only very skilled burglars get that kind of first impression.

It's a veil of marketing illusions, carefully calibrated to pull your levers.

I think a really cool way to look past that, is to break the layout with reality 

Stacked hasn't let me do this yet, but I totally will once I can get away with it: I think we should get the unit layout and a 3D rendition, and then cram it with what a unit actually accumulates like over time:

Giant sagging sofa, broken massage chair that we won't throw away because it's adapted to our body shape, tennis rackets and golf clubs we used twice and never again, and electronic… things, with cables going all over the room. 

Also, a kitchen that gets piled with assessment books and 10-year series exam papers, because that's the Singaporean family's favourite tuition spot.

If, after all that, the layout can still look decent, we'll know for sure that's a condo unit we can settle in for decades. The showflat reveals it at its best, so now let's see it at its worst.

For now, though, when you step into a showflat, here's a trick you might find useful: look at pictures of your current place on your phone, and visualise that — mess and all — in the space you're observing. This will help you see past the glamour.

Weekly sales roundup (June 30 – July 6)

Top 5 most expensive new sales (by project)

PROJECT NAME PRICE S$ AREA (SQFT) $PSF TENURE

32 GILSTEAD $15,000,000 4176 $3,592 FH

ONE MARINA GARDENS $4,981,601 1647 $3,025 99 yrs (2023)

NAVA GROVE $3,910,800 1550 $2,523 99 yrs (2024)

ELTA $3,611,000 1507 $2,396 99 yrs (2024)

GRAND DUNMAN $3,552,000 1421 $2,500 99 yrs (2022)

Top 5 cheapest new sales (by project)

PROJECT NAME PRICE S$ AREA (SQFT) $PSF TENURE

ONE MARINA GARDENS $1,197,953 420 $2,854 99 yrs (2023)

NOVO PLACE $1,393,000 872 $1,598 99 yrs (2023)

AURELLE OF TAMPINES $1,448,000 840 $1,725 99 yrs (2024)

BLOOMSBURY RESIDENCES $1,663,000 678 $2,452 99 yrs (2024)

SORA $1,851,000 732 $2,529 99 yrs (2023)

Top 5 most expensive resale

PROJECT NAME PRICE S$ AREA (SQFT) $PSF TENURE

LEEDON RESIDENCE $15,800,000 8051 $1,962 FH

GRANGE RESIDENCES $9,850,000 2852 $3,453 FH

SEASCAPE $6,929,000 3380 $2,050 99 yrs (2007)

REGENCY PARK $5,280,000 2260 $2,336 FH

SHELFORD GREEN $5,150,000 2842 $1,812 FH

Top 5 cheapest resale

PROJECT NAME PRICE S$ AREA (SQFT) $PSF TENURE

SKIES MILTONIA $706,000 484 $1,458 99 yrs (2012)

LAVERNE’S LOFT $780,000 474 $1,647 FH

SOL ACRES $781,000 495 $1,577 99 yrs (2014)

SYCAMORE TREE $793,000 409 $1,939 FH

THE TAPESTRY $795,000 474 $1,679 99 yrs (2017)

Top 5 biggest winners

PROJECT NAME PRICE S$ AREA (SQFT) $PSF RETURNS HOLDING PERIOD

GRANGE RESIDENCES $9,850,000 2852 $3,453 $6,503,891 21 Years

GRANGE RESIDENCES $9,738,000 2852 $3,414 $5,795,823 21 Years

LEEDON RESIDENCE $15,800,000 8051 $1,962 $3,300,000 8 Years

PARK INFINIA AT WEE NAM $3,780,000 1410 $2,681 $2,394,000 20 Years

PARK INFINIA AT WEE NAM $3,800,000 1432 $2,654 $2,200,000 19 Years

Top 5 biggest losers

PROJECT NAME PRICE S$ AREA (SQFT) $PSF RETURNS HOLDING PERIOD

REFLECTIONS AT KEPPEL BAY $2,800,000 1733 $1,616 -$1,380,000 12 Years

THE AVENIR $6,900,000 2411 $2,862 -$1,060,000 4 Years

OUE TWIN PEAKS $3,680,000 1604 $2,294 -$1,002,076 9 Years

ECO $958,888 635 $1,510 $3,888 9 Years

STARLIGHT SUITES $1,680,000 850 $1,976 $10,000 3 Years

Transaction breakdown

[[nid:719800]]

This article was first published in Stackedhomes.