Wallich Residence, Martin Modern, Gramercy Park, South Beach Residences. Trophy addresses, motivated sellers, and buyers who mostly declined to meet the asking price. A rare public look at the gap between valuation and clearing price.
Properties seized in connection with Singapore's S$3 billion money laundering case went under the hammer across three auctions in September. The results were sobering: all seven lots at the 17 September Knight Frank auction were withdrawn after failing to meet undisclosed reserve prices, and on 23 September only four of some 20 properties found takers, selling for a combined S$16.28 million.
Over three auction sessions in September, a large tranche of property seized in connection with Singapore's S$3 billion money laundering case was put in front of buyers. On paper it should have been an event: trophy addresses, genuine scarcity, a seller with every reason to transact, and guide prices published in advance.
What actually happened is more instructive than a clean sell-out would have been.
At the Knight Frank auction held at Ocean Financial Centre on Thursday 17 September, all seven properties were withdrawn after failing to meet their reserve prices, which were not disclosed. The room was not empty — 65 attendees, including 30 registered bidders, with some standing at the back.
The keenest bidding was for a two-bedroom plus study apartment at Gramercy Park, unit #21-07. Fully furnished, freehold, 1,292 sq ft, opening price S$3.82 million or S$2,957 psf. Initial offers of S$3.2 million and S$3.3 million were rejected. Bidding then picked up at S$3.5 million and rose in mostly S$25,000 increments as three interested parties competed. The highest offer came in at S$3.75 million, about S$2,902 psf — and the auctioneer withdrew the property because it fell short of reserve.
Read that again: three parties competed in a live room, the price moved up in steps, and the final number was within two per cent of the opening ask. It still wasn't enough.
A renovated four-bedroom at #17-01 followed a similar pattern. 2,659 sq ft with unblocked views, opened at S$7.55 million or about S$2,839 psf. Initial offers of S$4 million and S$4.5 million were rejected before bidding picked up from S$6 million, with two bidders trading offers to S$6.7 million, or around S$2,520 psf. Withdrawn.
Two three-bedroom apartments at Sloane Residences, 1,249 sq ft each, opened at S$3.65 million and S$3.68 million. Withdrawn. A 3,498 sq ft office unit at Suntec Tower One opened at S$11 million; an offer of S$8 million, about S$2,287 psf, was rejected.
Tricia Tan, director of auction and sales at Knight Frank, summarised it precisely: "There is interest, but (the bids) did not meet the reserve prices set." That single sentence is the whole story of the top end of this market right now — demand exists, but not at the number on the valuation report.
On Wednesday 23 September, two separate auctions ran. Only four of some 20 seized properties found takers, with units at Martin Modern and Wallich Residence selling for a total of S$16.28 million.
| Property | Detail | Sold At |
|---|---|---|
| Wallich Residence | Largest unit offered | S$6.60m |
| Wallich Residence | 1,658 sq ft, 53rd floor | S$5.48m |
| Martin Modern | 2-bedroom, 26th floor | S$2.12m |
| Martin Modern | 2-bedroom, 17th floor | S$2.08m |
Six Martin Modern units had been offered in total — four two-bedroom apartments of about 764 sq ft each, a 1,087 sq ft three-bedder and a 1,733 sq ft four-bedder. Four Wallich Residence units were listed: a 1,313 sq ft three-bedroom apartment and three four-bedroom apartments ranging from 1,658 to 1,991 sq ft.
At a separate ETC auction the same day, nine further properties went unsold. The eight residential lots — five apartments at South Beach Residences, two at 8 Saint Thomas and one at Paterson Suites — received no bids at all. Together the nine had opening prices totalling S$64.93 million. Only a four-storey strata terrace factory at 141 Shun Li Industrial Park drew a bid, at S$3.1 million or about S$349 psf against an opening price of S$3.63 million. It was withdrawn.
The priciest lot was a four-bedroom penthouse at South Beach Residences, unit #42-08, with an opening price of S$25.32 million, or S$3,764 psf. Spanning three levels and about 6,727 sq ft including 151 sq ft of strata void, with a private lift serving all levels and a roof terrace. It had eight viewings before the auction.
It drew no bids.
Four other South Beach Residences apartments also drew nothing: #24-06 at 1,744 sq ft with an opening price of S$6.6 million (S$3,784 psf), and three two-bedroom units between S$4.3 million and S$5.2 million — #26-03 at 1,216 sq ft (S$3,783 psf), #37-02 at 1,087 sq ft with no balcony (S$3,955 psf), and #41-03 at 1,292 sq ft (S$4,025 psf).
The two 8 Saint Thomas apartments drew more than 30 enquiries collectively, and the Paterson Suites unit more than 10. Enquiries, viewings, registered bidders — the interest was real. The bids, at those prices, were not.
One detail worth noting for context: ETC's head of auction and sales Joy Tan said most enquiries came from Singaporeans. The buyer pool for these assets was domestic, not the offshore money that originally bought them. That is a meaningfully different — and smaller — pool at these price points.
Published transaction data only records deals that happened. It cannot show you the ones that didn't, or the distance between what sellers wanted and what buyers offered. An auction makes that gap visible, in public, in real time.
At Gramercy Park the gap was about two per cent. At Suntec Tower One it was about 27 per cent. At the South Beach penthouse it was infinite, because nobody bid at all. That range — not any single number — is the honest picture of liquidity at the top of this market.
It sits oddly alongside the headline narrative of strong luxury demand. Both things can be true: well-capitalised buyers are active in prime, as the Q2 sentiment data suggests, while simultaneously refusing to pay paper valuations for specific units at specific addresses. Demand is selective, not absent.
I'd encourage everyone to read these results, whether or not you own anything remotely like these properties, because they demonstrate something you normally only learn the expensive way: a valuation is an opinion, and a price is what someone actually pays. Those diverge far more often than most owners expect, and the divergence is widest exactly where the market is thinnest.
The practical lesson scales down. If a 1,292 sq ft unit at Gramercy Park can attract three competing bidders and still miss its reserve, then a resale flat or a suburban condo priced on the best comparable in the block can sit unsold for months for the same reason. The comparable tells you what one buyer paid for one unit on one day. It doesn't tell you there's another buyer like that available now.
What I'd take from it if you're selling: set your reserve against the range of recent transactions, not the top of it, and be honest with yourself about how many buyers genuinely exist for your specific unit at your specific price. The sellers here had every incentive to transact and still didn't, because the reserve was set on paper rather than on the room. That's an avoidable mistake and it's the most common one I see.
Wondering what your own property would genuinely clear at, rather than what a portal estimate says?
WhatsApp Bryan → More guides →Sources: The Straits Times, 16 September 2026, "Fujian money launderers' super-luxe condos on auction block" by Grace Leong; The Business Times, 18 September 2026, "Luxury units seized in S$3b money laundering case fail to sell at auction" by Jeanne Mah; The Business Times, 24 September 2026, "Martin Modern, Wallich Residences properties linked to money laundering case sell for S$16.3m at auction" by Jeanne Mah. See also our earlier pieces on exit liquidity, luxury home sales and safe-haven demand, and how the ultra-rich buy property here. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice.
No pressure, no obligation. Tell me what you're working through and I'll get back to you within 24 hours to arrange a time that works.
Your details are used solely to follow up on your consultation request. No spam, ever.