Tan Kin Lian's Blog: Goh Chok Tong's comments on minibonds, high notes

Monday, September 29, 2008

Goh Chok Tong's comments on minibonds, high notes

Some investors have expressed disappointments at the comments made by Mr. Goh Chok Tong on minibonds and high notes.

I believe that Mr. Goh made the comments while in China. He may not be aware that many investors are retirees with low risk profile and were misled into investing in these high risk products by the advisers.

I suggest that investors should prepare the Petition letter to your Member of Parliament. You should see your MP to tell the MP about how you were misled into the investment. If the MPs hear the story from many of their constituents, they may be moved into taking this matter up in Parliament.

You can also sign the Petition letter to the Singapore Government. I will include my report on the possible wrong doings for the Government to investigate.

21 comments:

hongjun said...: Mr Goh commented:

"I know (individual) Singaporeans have been hurt; they have invested in Lehman Brothers mini-bonds, in High Notes ... and more have been hurt investing in equities, but that’s life — if you want to have a good rewards, you’ve got to take risk.

“Otherwise, leave your money in your CPF ... Four per cent is a fabulous return without risk. Singaporeans complained it was too low, (but) now they know the meaning of a capitalistic existence."; September 29, 2008 9:19 PM
Anonymous said...: Hi Mr. Tan,
There is an article that written by Andy Xie (who is an independent economist in Shanghai)

is it those local banks get mislead by oversea bank?

http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/08/14/6551/andy-xie-bury-the-greenspan-put-and-let-people-get-what-they-deserve/; September 29, 2008 9:31 PM
Anonymous said...: The whole saga seems much larger than FIs which distribute credit linked securities to investors. We should also sue Lehman Brothers which developed the toxic product.; September 29, 2008 10:02 PM
ym said...: ppl who lost a pile of their savings because of selling/underwriting credit derivatives (something that i doubt the chairman really understands himself).. the retirees' funds must be made whole..

since the MAS chairman touched on capitalist systems, what does he think of our "esteemed" capitalist banking system that allows bankers to create money out of thin air and manipulate the interest rates and forex rates?; September 29, 2008 10:16 PM
Anonymous said...: Is it true that US govt is investigating Lehman brothers for possible wrong doings?
Anyone has any idea?; September 29, 2008 11:56 PM
Anonymous said...: these toxic products are equivalent to the tainted milk case. One is seeing the youngs suffering while the other is seeing the olds suffering. Either case it is not a good product.; September 30, 2008 1:05 AM
Anonymous said...: I hope Mr Goh made the comment out of ignorance as he is in China. If not, then I think he has really lost touch with the ground. His staff should brief him and I hope he will apologise for the insensitive remarks.; September 30, 2008 7:55 AM
Unknown said...: Yes, US gov't is investigating Lehman for not disclosing their real financial situation. Take note that the Ratings Agencies continut to rate them as an "A" company before they folded. BTW, the ratings agency models are broken as well.; September 30, 2008 9:02 AM
Anonymous said...: same feeling as anonymous 7.55am.

I'm sad if our leaders do not make any efforts to understand the real issues involved, & jump to such conclusions.

And if they have understood the issues and still make such remarks, I'll be sadder. Not only losing touch with ground, but also losing the basic sympathy for the weak.; September 30, 2008 12:25 PM
Anonymous said...: Anon of 7.55 pm. wrote:-
"I hope Mr Goh made the comment out of ignorance as he is in China."
Haha, paid millions a year and ignorant? I think the one who is ignorant is you. Are you the 66.6% or the 33.3%?; September 30, 2008 12:26 PM
Anonymous said...: Yes,i agree if we want good rewards,we must take risk. Just like stocks and other investment. But when we invest in stocks,we are prepare for the risk. But now the situation is that commoners are not inform of the risk,how they judge can if the returns they are getting is worth the risk? They have the impression of this minibonds are safe.If they were to know about the risk,i believe that they will not place the money in. And if they would,they will be prepare for the loss and not complaining now.Those people,who have low risk profile,are suffering becuase those being mislead and mis-sold of the products,.; September 30, 2008 12:52 PM
Anonymous said...: It is not uncommon at times for people who made insensitive remarks. I hope is because he is not fully aware of the situation.; September 30, 2008 1:55 PM
WY said...: There is something that I missed out and don’t really understand.

Are structured products, credit-linked notes CPF-approved ?
In other words, can CPF be used to buy these products ?

If these products are CPF-approved, why CPF “Board” approves using CPF to invest in these products but not other investment products ? Wonder what the criteria are.

If these products are not CPF-approved and so cannot be invested using CPF, why Mr. Goh says so ?

I wonder whether he is being “misquoted”. :-)

Anybody has the news link showing what he really says ?; September 30, 2008 2:50 PM
hongjun said...: Goh Chok Tong on TodayOnline.

http://www.todayonline.com/articles/278589.asp; September 30, 2008 5:21 PM
Anonymous said...: He is dazed after the spacewalk. He is hullucinating. He is confused. He thought the structured products are
CPFIS approved. When he is saner we have the real thing.; September 30, 2008 6:05 PM
Anonymous said...: No lar. I think he referred to retirees who drew out monies from CPF after age 62 and invested in structured products, thinking of getting higher returns.; September 30, 2008 7:29 PM
WY said...: To hon chun :
Thanks for your news link.

To anonymous:
OIC. I guess that is what Mr. Goh means on CPF – minibond.
But just wonder for investors who are affected, how’s the statistics (age group, amount, education level etc..) like ?; October 01, 2008 4:16 PM
Anonymous said...: Please also make a survey on how rich the victims are. I have a feeling that majority are rich people who can take the loss.; October 02, 2008 1:45 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous of 1:45pm, pl don't ASSUME(that majority of the investors are rich). Among them are those illiterate who managed to save a few thousand $ during their whole life and were conned by those so called RMs in reputable(our island becoming a Regional Financial HUB) Singapore Banks into parting with their COFFIN MONEY in order to earn an interest rate of mere 5%(comparable to the present CPF retirement fund rate). You think they can afford the loss???? Can these poor folks put their money into CPF (I doubt they even know that there is a so-call retirement fund top-up scheme). So I hope SM Goh should ask all the S'pore grassroot leaders to knock on every door (i mean low-income doors)and inform them of this if he thinks that singaporean are well informed but still insist on taking the risk. Those illiterate might not even know by now that they hard-earned COFFIN MONEY are now 'GONE WITH THE WIND'. So, I hope that those at the IVORY TOWER please (for goodness sake), roll up your sleeves, take off your tie, come down and walk the ground(and don't walk with a whole regiment following from behind),mingle(have coffee/tea at coffee shops/hawker centres, void deck),visit the 1-room flat dwellers, go to work by public transport(Bus,MRT not taxi)on rainy days & hear what the people have to say. This way, decisions can be made more compassionately.I am not from the opposition, but just feeling rather frustrated in recent years that govt policies were made not for the people.; October 04, 2008 12:48 AM
Anonymous said...: To Anonymous of 1:45pm too. No matter they are rich or poor, no one likes his/her money be cheated by such a way, by a so called renowned FI.

ask yourself, do you think a 5% return worth the risk hidden under HN5 or not? If you do not think it is worthwhile, how would a greedy person (I assume that you think the investtor bought it due to greediness) take the risk?

The only answer is the ignorance of the risk, the blind trustness on the FIs. Is it the investors fault?; October 04, 2008 3:22 PM
Anonymous said...: The more times I read the pricing statement of HN2, the more I am feeling that I was cheated by DBS.

I would rather my money being robbed by a robber in the street, than paying it to DBS. Because in the former case, the robber would feel guilty and hide somewhere. As for DBS saga, they must be laughing: "how stupid these people! we just copied the idea of Lemman Brothers, and made it even blurred, we've easlily fished hundreds millions of dollars..."

Wish DBS be always as lucky as Lemman Brothers.; October 04, 2008 9:15 PM