According to Tim Burggraaf of pensions adviser Mercer, the low interest rates make it expensive to transfer pensions to an insurer, which must offer a guaranteed pension. “As the margin is very small, taking over pension plans has become less profitable, and many insurers have stopped offering pension arrangements altogether,” he said.His view was echoed by John Smolenaers at pensions adviser Towers Watson, who said insurers could not continue to offer their high rates during the height of the financial crisis.“Back then, pension funds with a considerable shortfall could join an insurer without any rights cuts,” he said. “Fees are higher now.”However, a spokeswoman at Aegon said the insurer did not recognise a lack of appetite among pension funds.“We don’t have any problems offering attractive conditions to pension funds,” said Hilde Laffeber.“Following the ongoing consolidation in the sector, we even notice an increase of schemes placing their arrangements with us.”Currently, Aegon is pensions provider for 40 pension funds with 900,000 participants in total. Dutch pension funds that are winding up are increasingly turning to mergers with other pension funds rather than placing their pension plans with an insurer.Citing figures from regulator De Nederlandsche Bank, financial news daily Financieele Dagblad reported that 70% of liquidating schemes opted for another pension fund during the first six months this year, while no more than 50% did in 2011.As a consequence of the historically low interest rates, insurers are unable to offer attractive benefits at the retirement date, it said.Although the association of Dutch insurers (VvV) acknowledged pension funds’ decreasing interest in contracting insurers, its spokesman noted that many employers had opted for directly insured arrangements.
“Over the past two and a half years, we’ve done a major overhaul of how we think about it, how we analyse it.”ATP splits its assets into an investment portfolio, consisting of its bonus reserves, which are worth around DKK100bn, and a much larger hedging portfolio worth about DKK670bn, which is designed to back its pension guarantees.The new investment portfolio shape is still a work in progress and will be announced officially with the pension fund’s year-end results in January, Stendevad said.The strategic changes ATP has been gradually making since 2013, encompassing many areas of its operation, have been prompted by problems facing the fund such as low interest rates, changing diversification patterns between asset types and the significant drop in market liquidity over the last 13 years, he said.ATP had been concerned that a portfolio construction approach centred around traditional asset classes overestimated the amount of diversification actually achieved.“We have gone a different way, thinking very intensively about risk factors,” Stendevad said.The team behind the move had questioned, for example, whether real estate and infrastructure were really very different, or whether they could somehow be broken down into some common risk factors.“From now on, every single investment we have we decompose it into four risk factors,” Stendevad said.Commodities are now included within the inflation factor group, while unlisted equities are largely included in the equity factor group but partially in the “other factors” group. Index-linked bonds are included in both interest rate factor and inflation factor groups, while corporate bonds fall within the interest rate factor group and the equity factor group.The “other factors” group is basically a combination of alternative risk premiums in the liquid space – long-short strategies, momentum and low volatility, for example – as well as the pure form of illiquidity premiums, Stendevad said.ATP has set a pre-tax absolute return target of 9% a year over time for its investment portfolio.This is based on what the fund needs to achieve in terms of generating returns for scheme members that beats inflation, Stendevad said.Another part of the investment overhaul is a sharper focus on direct investments.While the pension fund lacks the scale to invest 100% in-house, it is now thinking hard about which investments it wants to have in-house and how much value it is actually getting from external mandates.“One of the changes we have made is really in the illiquid space,” Stendevad said.“We have far fewer funds – we have reduced this by almost €1bn, and that trend will continue.”From mid-2013 to mid-2015, ATP’s fund investments fell to €7.5bn from €8.7bn, while direct investments – including equity, real estate and infrastructure and structured credit – more than doubled to €6.2bn from €2.8bn, according to data Stendevad showed.ATP could take direct equity investments by participating in IPOs, he said, or in situations where listed equity is being taken private, for example.“Today, we have some real estate funds, but, as soon as we can unwind them, we will go over to a pure-play, direct investment strategy,” Stendevad said, adding that the pension fund had already made good headway here. Denmark’s ATP has revealed the final shape of its return-seeking investment portfolio after a long overhaul of its wider strategy including portfolio construction, with the assets now being grouped under four “risk factors” rather than the five “risk classes” it has used since 2006.The statutory pension fund, which manages around DKK770bn (€103bn) in assets, announced at the 2015 IPE Conference in Barcelona that its DKK100bn investment portfolio would now be separated into “interest rate factor”, “inflation factor”, “equity factor” and “other factors” groupings.This is a change from the previous construction, which involved five risk “classes” – commodities, credit, inflation, equity and interest rates.Carsten Stendevad, chief executive at ATP, said: “Since 2006, we’ve thought about risk classes and risk budgets, and that’s been very ingrained in us.
The UK’s national pension fund association has published a guide to help trustees of defined contribution (DC) workplace pension schemes meet their new legal requirement to assess good value, stepping in with the assistance in the absence of a statutory definition. Under new regulations effective in the UK this past April, trustees of DC occupational pension schemes providing money purchase benefits have to assess and explain the extent to which costs and charges in their scheme represent good value for members.The outcome of the assessment has to be explained in an annual governance statement from the chair, another legal requirement introduced in April.However, there is no statutory definition of good value, and regulatory guidance is limited. The Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association (PLSA) has therefore developed a six-step plan and a guide to best practice to help trustees assess good value.It said the assessment involved a subjective judgement and that “there is no single right answer”, but it highlights what can be expected of trustees and the key steps involved in assessing value for money.The guide was developed in association with the law firm Eversheds.Mark Latimour, head of pensions investment at Eversheds, said the question of what constitutes good value and how trustees should assess is prompting much debate in the pensions industry.“Similar questions are also being debated in the context of the new independent governance committees, which have been established to scrutinise the value for money of workplace personal pension schemes,” he said.The PLSA’s guide draws on the UK regulator’s new draft DC code of practice and discussions with scheme members and the regulator.The association notes that, in the code of practice, The Pensions Regulator (TPR) says a scheme is likely to offer good value where “the combination of costs and what is provided for the costs is appropriate for the scheme membership as a whole, and when compared with other options available in the market”.In other words, value cannot be assessed in a vacuum, the PLSA said.Amy Hennessy, policy adviser at the association, said the new guide offered trustees practical guidance on approaching the assessment and sets out best practice “in this evolving area”.“Assessing value for members is not a tick-box exercise,” she added. “Neither is it a static one. Trustees are committed to ensuring members get the best retirement outcomes possible and will use this assessment as part of their ongoing efforts to review, revise and improve their scheme to ensure it continues to deliver for members.”,WebsitesWe are not responsible for the content of external sitesLink to PLSA ‘Assessing Good Value for Members’ guide
The UK’s Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association (PLSA) has launched a taskforce to tackle the problems faced by defined benefit (DB) pension schemes and come up with solutions and recommendations for the UK government. The former deputy chair of the Bank of England’s working group on procyclicality by pension funds and insurance companies will chair the taskforce.It counts Stephen Soper, the former head of DB and interim chief executive of the UK pensions regulator, among its seven other members. Soper has been senior pensions adviser at PwC since September. Joanne Segars, chief executive of the PLSA, announced the launch of the initiative at the association’s investment conference in Edinburgh today.“The difficulties facing defined benefit schemes are much talked about, and they often seem too complex or enormous to address – but those problems aren’t going away any time soon,” she said.The taskforce will “tease out” the detail of the challenges facing DB schemes and set out possible solutions, she added. “Some of those solutions may be radical, but, if we work together, I am confident we can find the right answers.” The taskforce, which comprises industry experts and academics, will seek views and evidence from schemes of all sizes, as well as sponsors, regulators, government and intermediaries.It intends to report its initial findings in the summer and has been tasked to come up with recommendations for the UK government by October, with a full report to be published at the PLSA’s annual conference that month.Ashok Gupta, chair of the new taskforce, said it would aim “to cut through the Gordian Knot” facing UK pension schemes. “There is broad consensus the pensions sector should provide long-term sustainable outcomes for members and act as a powerful engine of growth to the economy,” he said. “It is clear however, that for some time pension schemes have been grappling with a wide range of challenges, including scheme funding, changing regulatory requirements and an uncertain macro-economic environment.“These have hampered their ability to deliver both commonly agreed objectives.” The other members of the taskforce are:Duncan Buchanan, partner, Hogan Lovells and president, Society of Pensions ProfessionalsFrank Johnson, PLSA DB Council and former managing director of investments at RPMI RailpenJackie Peel, PLSA DB CouncilPaul Trickett, chairman of trustees of the Legal and General Mastertrust and Zurich UK pension schemeKevin Wesbroom, senior partner, Aon HewittLesley Williams, PLSA chair
The majority of respondents, 83% and 58%, respectively, said they would use fewer research providers once the new rules come into effect, and that spending on FICC research would increase.An overwhelming majority (86%) said a reduction in the number of research providers would not hurt their funds’ performance. This, AMIC said, pointed to a potential oversupply of research.The vast majority of respondents said they expected to be compliant by the 3 January deadline for research cost unbundling, although more than 60% said they were not yet compliant.Increasing in-house FICC research capacity is on the agenda for a third of respondents, while 68% indicated they did not plan to do so.The world according to MiFID II cost unbundlingMore than 60% of asset managers with global activities plan to pay separately for fixed income research, according to the survey. The remainder largely planned to pay for research in non-EU jurisdictions only for EU clients (31%), while 8% said they would segregate their EU and non-EU businesses.Patrick Karlsson, secretary to the ICMA AMIC, said the figures showed MiFID II would have a global effect.EU and US regulators recently said non-EU asset managers could continue to bundle trading costs and research costs as long as the two were distinguishable from each other. The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) said it would grant this relief for 30 months.Speaking at an ICMA AMIC event yesterday, Ross Barrett, capital markets specialist at the UK’s asset management trade body, the Investment Association, said the SEC’s announcement was very important, but guidance from the European Commission had solved the issue “for the rest of the world”.“And that does matter,” he continued, “because MiFID II is a new bar, it’s a higher bar that doesn’t exist anywhere else in the world.”Asking managers to comply with the rules in other jurisdictions that in many case had rules to the opposite – such as the US – was not acceptable, he said.Chris Devain, chairman of the European Association of Independent Research Providers, said asset owners were key to changing practices in non-MiFID II jurisdictions.Once asset owners both in Europe and the US “get a flavour and taste for some of the reports that will come out of Europe and that increased transparency” they could put more pressure on US firms that deal internationally to comply with MiFID II research unbundling. The majority of investors think the quality of fixed income, currencies and commodities (FICC) research will not change in the wake of MiFID II rules on research cost unbundling, according to a survey carried out by the International Capital Market Association (ICMA).However, roughly under a third (32%) said they believed it would get worse, and 14% that it would improve.The survey was of members of the ICMA Asset Management and Investors’ Council (AMIC) and was carried out last month. It sought to discover firms’ intentions and progress regarding the implementation of MiFID II research unbundling requirements specifically in relation to FICC research.Just under half (46%) of the investors said a significant majority (75% or more) of their existing FICC research providers had not yet approached them about potential pricing arrangements.
EIOPA’s headquarters in Frankfurt, GermanyIn the DB sector, the supervisory authority found that, in the modelled stress scenario, the sponsors of more than a quarter of DB and hybrid schemes might not be able to fully support their pension promises.Their obligations could exert substantial pressure on the solvency and future profitability of the companies, EIOPA said.Double-whammyEIOPA’s stress test sought to identify how European pension funds would fare under a “double-hit” triggered by a shock to EU equity markets. One of the hits was a fall in fixed income and risk asset prices. The other hit was a drop in risk-free interest rates. The scenario was severe, but not implausible, said EIOPA chairman Gabriel Bernardino.For a quarter of the pension funds captured by the stress test, the value of sponsor contributions exceeded 42% of the company’s market value in the pre-stress scenario and 66% under the adverse scenario. This was on the basis of EIOPA’s “common balance sheet”.“Benefit reductions have similar negative effects on the real economy by reducing household income and consumption, but also resulting in lack of trust in the pensions system,” said EIOPA.In the DC sector, it said, the short-term effect on the real economy of lower replacement rates would depend on the extent to which DC members considered projected declines in retirement income in their current decisions about consumption and saving. Financial stabilisers EIOPA also considered the impact pension funds could have on financial stability in times of stress.It noted that the IORP sector did not seem to impact financial stability in the same way and to the same extent as banking or insurance, but that adverse effects on sponsors and/or beneficiaries, and the potential indirect impact on the real economy, warranted taking a holistic view and considering implications for financial stability.However, the stress test indicated that pension funds were more of a stabilising rather than destabilising force. IORPs could alleviate selling pressure during stressed market conditions because of rebalancing behaviour and the fact that many pension funds followed a buy-and-hold strategy, EIOPA said. For the first time, EIOPA’s IORP stress test sought to assess the potential impact on the real economy from shocks to the pension fund sector. Gabriel Bernardino, EIOPA chairmanThe supervisor found an absence of herding behaviour, its chairman Gabriel Bernardino said during a press conference.However, he said it was difficult to draw firm conclusions as a substantial proportion of IORPs failed to provide information, “compromising the representativeness of the sample”.EIOPA was aiming for a 50% coverage rate in terms of the total assets of each national IORP sector, but only managed 39%, in particular due to a lack of data from Ireland and the UK.The supervisors in these countries mainly attributed this to them having a lack of powers to require participation in the stress test.For EIOPA, “these inadequate supervisory powers in certain jurisdictions are one of the key findings of this exercise and may be a source of risk as national and EU authorities may not be able to assess all relevant information and vulnerabilities of the sector during adverse events,” it said. ‘Kicking the can’ not fair If efforts to close funding gaps were put off for too long, the burden of restoring the sustainability of IORPs could fall disproportionately on younger generations, EIOPA warned. This was especially the case if investment returns fell short of expectations.“It is therefore of paramount importance to continue assessing relevant shortfalls using market-sensitive methodologies, the feasibility of sponsor support and benefit reduction mechanisms, also further enhancing the cash flow analysis in order to gain further insights into the time element of the vulnerabilities,” said EIOPA.Bernardino emphasised the importance of transparency, including to the public and beneficiaries. He said pension funds needed to disclose information about the sustainability of pension promises so that a dialogue with sponsors and members could take place “on a more realistic basis”.“Transparency can only help to close the gaps,” he said.“Environmental, social and governance aspects including climate change … will require cautious assessment of any financial stability implications”Gabriel BernardinoMore realistic valuations forcing action sooner rather than later was one way of dealing with the risks of funding shortfalls, he noted.ESG aspects in next stress testIn keeping with the European Commission’s proposal for European supervisory authorities to integrate sustainability into their mandate, EIOPA said this was one of its strategic priorities for 2018.In a statement, it said “environmental, social and governance (ESG) aspects including climate change will be of growing importance for the pensions sector and will require cautious assessment of any financial stability implications”.Asked to elaborate on this, Bernardino told the press conference that EIOPA was focused on how the pension fund sector could contribute to a smooth transition to a lower carbon economy, and that it would be “quite attentive” to ESG obligations under the incoming IORP II Directive.ESG aspects would likely be included in the next IORP stress tests, scheduled for 2019, according to Bernardino. EIOPA has warned European pension funds against “kicking the can down the road” and unfairly burdening the younger generation after its latest stress test of the sector pointed to large deficits and potential adverse effects on the real economy. In its second stress test of 195 European occupational pension funds – IORPs, in EU regulatory parlance – from 20 countries, the supervisory authority found that providers of defined benefit (DB) and hybrid schemes had an aggregate deficit of around €300bn, corresponding to a funding ratio of 79%. This was on the basis of the different valuation standards used in individual countries.On the basis of EIOPA’s “common balance sheet” – developed by EIOPA to enable comparisons and provide an EU-wide picture – the deficit deteriorated to €700bn, and the funding ratio to 38%.In the defined contribution (DC) sector, the market value of invested assets would drop by 15% in the stress scenario, EIOPA found. If persistent, this could lead to lower pension income upon retirement.
In May, prime minister Theresa May announced the first wave of a number of “missions” intended to tackle the “grand challenges” of the most pressing global issues of our time. One in three babies born today in the UK will live to 100 years old, according to latest estimates.The UK is not exceptional in this regard: As societies age, supporting a 100-year life raises immense challenges as well as creating new opportunities. The financial services industry can play its part, but it may require some radical re-engineering to do so.Last week, Dawid Konotey-Ahulu, co-founder of UK investment consultancy Redington, led a delegation of senior UK financial executives – including a number of CEOs of leading UK insurance companies and fund managers, industry experts and innovators – to a meeting at the UK prime minister’s residence, 10 Downing Street.The objective was to consider new collaborative efforts to tackle the issues related to an ageing society. It requires disruptive innovation, and government and industry need to work together to collectively tackle one of society’s greatest challenges: to improve the number of years that people can expect to live healthy, independent and resilient lives, matching quality-of-life improvements to increasing longevity. The UK government is looking to industry for answersThe first mission set for the Ageing Grand Challenge is “to ensure that people can enjoy at least five extra healthy, independent years of life by 2035, while narrowing the gap between the experience of the richest and poorest”.This requires efforts across a number of ‘pillars’: health and care; work and engagement with society post-retirement; homes, families and communities; and – critically – finance and the economy.These ideas are applicable throughout all developed countries, and even many emerging economies. Financial services play a critical role in supporting people to be financial secure across the 100-year life, but many would question whether the industry as it stands is fit for purpose.Industry leaders recognise this, but struggle to collaborate to achieve the solutions required to tackle key issues: How will the 100-year life change individuals’ financial needs as they age?How could financial technology and new uses of data disrupt the existing eco-system?How can financial services integrate with other ageing-related sectors?How can integrated financial products be designed to meet the needs of all people in future?How can we ensure people have affordable and timely access to the right financial products?Delving deeper into what is currently on offer today from the financial services industry, there are specific sub-challenges:How can it be ensured that every customer receives fair value on their investments?How can investments that offer poor value be eliminated?How can people be allowed to access all of their finance-related information on their smart devices, to help make informed choices?How can people be rapidly and effectively educated about their options and responsibilities to prepare for the 100-year life?How can financial services products be tailored to specific care needs in later life?If returns on most investments are likely to be less than 5% in real terms for the indefinite future, the financial services industry faces real challenges. Many products currently offered to the mass retail savings market have all-in costs that may be 2% a year or higher. Indeed, for many products, the returns after all costs are more likely to be negative in nominal terms.Encouraging people to save in this environment may be a fool’s errand. Yet not encouraging them to save places too high a burden on the state to provide out of general taxation, in a scenario where dependency ratios are rising.Something has to change. Redington’s initiative to try to get the industry to collaborate on these key issues is laudable. If governments and the industry wish to prepare for 100-year lives, no one company can hope to even understand the issues and opportunities, let alone create all the solutions.The challenge for the industry, though, is that the scale of disruption required may lead to many companies going the way of Kodak, Blockbuster and BHS – unless they make some bold decisions that may result in speeding up the destruction of their own existing franchises.
KLM’s scheme for cabin crew is overhauling its board structureThe €3.2bn KLM pension fund for cabin staff (Cabinepersoneel) is to switch from a board of equal representation to a two-tier board as of 1 July.The new board will comprise three external executive members and six non-executive trustees representing workers, pensioners and the sponsor, under by an independent chair.In the new board model, the non-executive members will operate as a supervisory board, supported by an external audit committee.Currently, the pension fund has a single 10-person board.On its website, KLM Cabinepersoneel explained that finding new board members had become increasingly difficult legal requirements for trustees had become stricter.It believed a two-tier board would solve this problem while maintaining communications with and accountability to the scheme’s membership.The new board will remain accountable to the pension fund’s accountability body.The pension fund indicated that board costs would rise slightly, but would be offset in part by better decision-making and lower implementation costs.The KLM pension fund is not the first scheme opting for the two-tier board, which became a legal option in 2014. The Dutch schemes of Philips (€18.5bn), IBM (€4.5bn), Ahold Delhaize (€4.6bn) and ABN Amro (€26.5bn) have already adopted the model, as have the industry-wide schemes PME (€47bn), Schoonmaak (€5bn) and SBZ (€5.4bn).In January, the €1.3bn pension fund of shipping firm Nedlloyd announced a plan to adopt the two-tier model. As a consequence, 555 pensioners received €12 too much every month, and ABP had asked them to reimburse these benefits. Pieter Omtzigt, MP for Christian Democrats party in NetherlandsIt decided to refrain from reclaiming from pensioners whose overpayments were less than €12 a month, and promised to fully compensate more than 600 other pensioners who were underpaid.Koolmees did not comment on criteria for reclaiming pension payments “as this is the schemes’ responsibility”.He suggested that pension funds should lay down their policy for the issue “with guarantees for content and process”.KLM’s cabin staff scheme opts for two-tier board Pension funds have a legal duty to reclaim pension benefits that have been paid out by mistake, according to Dutch social affairs minister Wouter Koolmees.Answering questions posed by MP Pieter Omtzigt, he said that pension funds should also focus on the outcomes for members in order to avoid “unnecessary legal discourse”.Omtzigt – MP for the Christian Democrats (CDA) – wanted to know participants’ rights if they had received benefits without being aware that they were too high.His questions were triggered by the €407bn civil service scheme ABP, which tried to claw back benefits it had paid based on information obtained from social security bank SVB, which turned out to be incorrect.
Merseyside supports the fund’s “mission to deliver tangible social opportunities to the people it houses and the neighbourhoods where it invests. Its decision to proceed demonstrates that investment into the co-living sector has not been waylaid due to the COVID-19 pandemic”, DTZ said.With a focus on the London market, DTZ said, the fund helps address the capital’s housing shortage by increasing the supply of an innovative residential asset class.DTZ added: “Alongside the focus on social impact, a heavy emphasis is placed on positive environmental initiatives with the potential to drive down carbon emissions through the delivery of a sharing economy housing model in central and highly accessible locations, and the opportunity to increase the delivery and diversity of homes across London.”Kate Fearnley, head of investor relations for COLIV at DTZ Investors, said: “The team at Merseyside shares our view, and that of The Collective, that it is incumbent on real estate investors and managers to have a positive impact on society whilst striving to achieve a strong risk-adjusted return.“A further like-minded investor onboard will galvanise the fund’s efforts to provide a housing solution that responds to renters’ demands for convenient accommodation and society’s need for buildings and places that bring communities together.”Looking for IPE’s latest magazine? Read the digital edition here. Merseyside Pension Fund, with total assets worth £8.88bn (€9.7bn), has joined other investors, including the Strathclyde Pension Fund, in investing in a co-living fund managed by DTZ Investors.The Liverpool-based local authority pension fund confirmed the undisclosed investment which gives asset owners such as Merseyside Pension Fund the opportunity to invest in the London large-scale purpose-built co-living sector.COLIV, DTZ’s fund, which has £170m of capital to invest (assuming leverage), was launched in October last year with DTZI as the investment adviser and The Collective, the leading global co-living operator and developer, acting as asset and property manager, it announced.The fund is seeking to provide investors with an attractive core-plus return of 8-10% p.a., and intends to build a portfolio of best-in-class large-scale co-living assets in London over a four-year investment period, it said.
MORE NEWS: How’s the serenity? Coast ‘castle’ hit the market More than half of the community is dedicated to open space and conservation with additional planned amenities including bike and walking trails.Foreshore Coomera is 26km from the Gold Coast CBD and a short drive to the Coomera Train Station, with easy access to the M1. The Coomera East Shopping Centre is adjacent to the community, and the newly opened Westfield Coomera is 2km away. Family buys $2 million house for Uber Artist’s impression of the view at Foreshore Coomera.TEN home sites in Stockland’s Foreshore Coomera residential community have hit the market as buyers continue to snap up blocks in the popular waterside community.The Vue land release will allow buyers to build a dream home with their choice of views of the Surfers Paradise city skyline, parkland or the neighbouring Coomera River.The land release comes as the first residents prepare to move into Foreshore Coomera before the end of the year, in a major milestone for the new community. Video Player is loading.Play VideoPlayNext playlist itemMuteCurrent Time 0:00/Duration 1:58Loaded: 0%Stream Type LIVESeek to live, currently playing liveLIVERemaining Time -1:58 Playback Rate1xChaptersChaptersDescriptionsdescriptions off, selectedCaptionscaptions settings, opens captions settings dialogcaptions off, selectedQuality Levels720p720pHD576p576p360p360p216p216pAutoA, selectedAudio Tracken (Main), selectedFullscreenThis is a modal window.Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.TextColorWhiteBlackRedGreenBlueYellowMagentaCyanTransparencyOpaqueSemi-TransparentBackgroundColorBlackWhiteRedGreenBlueYellowMagentaCyanTransparencyOpaqueSemi-TransparentTransparentWindowColorBlackWhiteRedGreenBlueYellowMagentaCyanTransparencyTransparentSemi-TransparentOpaqueFont Size50%75%100%125%150%175%200%300%400%Text Edge StyleNoneRaisedDepressedUniformDropshadowFont FamilyProportional Sans-SerifMonospace Sans-SerifProportional SerifMonospace SerifCasualScriptSmall CapsReset restore all settings to the default valuesDoneClose Modal DialogEnd of dialog window.This is a modal window. This modal can be closed by pressing the Escape key or activating the close button.Close Modal DialogThis is a modal window. This modal can be closed by pressing the Escape key or activating the close button.PlayMuteCurrent Time 0:00/Duration 0:00Loaded: 0%Stream Type LIVESeek to live, currently playing liveLIVERemaining Time -0:00 Playback Rate1xFullscreenWhy location is everything in real estate01:59David Laner, acting Queensland general manager for residential communities at Stockland, said the release of premium lots at the Vue was in response to strong demand from buyers.“Foreshore Coomera’s 2.5km of river frontage, proximity to the Coomera Town Centre and easy access to transport links, schools, shops and jobs is a winning combination for future homeowners,” Mr Laner said. More from news02:37International architect Desmond Brooks selling luxury beach villa14 hours ago02:37Gold Coast property: Sovereign Islands mega mansion hits market with $16m price tag2 days ago“It’s exciting to see the community taking shape, with the first homes already under construction, and we are looking forward to welcoming our first residents soon.”Blocks in the Vue will range from 375sq m to 600sq m, with prices starting from $350,900.