Tan Kin Lian's Blog: None Are So Blind As Those Who Will Not See The Truth

Monday, November 17, 2008

None Are So Blind As Those Who Will Not See The Truth

When I read the statements from various high-level ministers about investors who should be aware about the nature of the credit linked notes, I recall a statement: "None Are So Blind As Those Who Will Not See The Truth"

41 comments:

singaporenewsalternative said...: In today's TNP, Larry Haverkamp, in his Dr Money column, argues that it is not always possible to apply this "caveat emptor" maxim. One of the point he made is that all information about cost, risk and returns have to be in the prospectus, which he find lacking. His column will be available online tomorrow, so pls read it.; November 17, 2008 6:58 PM
Anonymous said...: http://www.channelnewsasia.com

2 town councils invested S$12m in Lehman-related structured products

17 November 2008 1646 hrs (SST) 0846 hrs (GMT)

SINGAPORE: Two out of 14 PAP-run town councils in Singapore have invested in Lehman-linked structured products.

Holland-Bukit Panjang and Pasir Ris-Punggol town councils have invested a total of S$12 million in DBS High Notes, Lehman Brothers' Minibond Notes and Merrill Lynch's Jubilee Series 3.

That's about 0.6 per cent of the total funds available for investments.

Senior Minister of State for National Development and Education Grace Fu gave this update in Parliament on Monday.

Town councils can invest up to 35 per cent of their sinking funds in corporate bonds and equities.

Based on the financial statements submitted to the National Development Ministry for 2007, Holland-Bukit Panjang Town Council invested about S$8 million or 6.7 per cent of its available funds while Pasir Ris-Punggol Town Council invested some 2.6 per cent totalling S$4 million.

Other town councils such as Aljunied, Ang Mo Kio-Yio Chu Kang, Hong Kah, Marine Parade, Tampines and Tanjong Pagar also have exposure to Lehman Brothers.

The fund managers appointed by these town councils invested S$4 million in Lehman Brothers through their investment portfolio.

These account for less than one per cent of each town council's funds available for investments. - CNA/vm; November 17, 2008 7:09 PM
Anonymous said...: So can we test this "caveat emptor" case in court? What are the chances of those who say "not always possible to apply" win their case?

Any good lawyers (if they have time or bother to read this) can care to comment?; November 17, 2008 7:17 PM
Anonymous said...: It has just been confirmed that our Town Councils lost tens of millions in the scams by the foreign investment banks and our very own DBS.

These Town Councils must have expert advice in investment. They must have gone in with their eyes open, must have been greedy for 5% return when banks are offering only 1%, they must have asked if the banks were in dire need of their money by offering such a high return, and by law, the case is closed.

But have the Town Councils received any compensation ? As ratepayers, we should be angry that the Town Councils are not compensated. But, may be the Town Councils have been compensated out of goodwill of the banks ?; November 17, 2008 7:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Hi Mr Tan,

I had bought the Pinnacle investment as my friend who had bought it also introduced it to me. My friend was clearly also misled by the bank officer into believing that this is a low risk investment. Based on the same understanding, I also invested into this product. I have also written in together with my friend to complain. In your opinion, do you think I stand a chance to be refunded if my friend is also refunded? I am worried that they would say that my friend misled me and not the bank.; November 17, 2008 8:04 PM
Anonymous said...: I suggest the 10,000+ affected “investors” print t-shirts and paper bags with some catchy slogan (something to this effect: “retirement funds mini-bombed, left to fend on my own in S’pore”). “Shop” along Orchard Road daily or weekly. Hopefully it will be blinding enough so that the blind can ragain partial sight.; November 17, 2008 8:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Now the gov has confirmed that some town councils have invested more than $12 million in structured products such as high notes, pinnacle and minibonds.
We would like the town councils to answer some questions:
1. If they feel that they have been mis-sold the products and that the risks were not properly disclosed to them, are they going to lodge a complaint? If not, why? This are public funds.
2. If the town councils have purchased these products with their eyes wide-opened, then who have made the decision? Was it the fund managers? How much did they pay the fund managers that made such a recommendation?

According to the news, town councils can invest up to 35% of the sinking fund in bonds and equities. The question here is that structured products are neither bonds nor equities. So have these town councils breach the regulations. Who is supervising the activities of town councils and will there be investigation into such investment activities by town councils before more losses are uncovered?
Such questions should be asked by our MPs.; November 17, 2008 8:42 PM
Jon said...: "Caveat Emptor", meet "Implied Warranty of Fitness".

Caveat Emptor was the principle that the buyer of a piece of property is responsible for determining the fitfullness for use or habitation of that property. But it does not mean that the seller can try to 'hide' problems and not be responsible for conveying the property that has unknown defects that were purposefully hidden or unrevealed in the normal buyer review process. The principle of Caveat Emptor, was used in an 1817 Supreme Court decision in the US but has been largely replaced by the Implied Warranty of Fitness.

http://madjaymon.blogspot.com/2008/01/caveat-emptor-moral-hazards-and-long.html; November 17, 2008 8:47 PM
Anonymous said...: I have a quesion. When Grace Fu said that they allow Town Councils to invest 35% of sinking funds for investment purpose, does it imply that if they lose all the 35%, they don't have to be responsible for it?; November 17, 2008 9:03 PM
Anonymous said...: The ministers will see it only when HK authorities take actions against the structured products and their sellers. Singapore's politicians like to follow others, to avoid risk of standing out like a sore thumb? They are followers, not leaders. If you understand this, you will be more calm and less angry.; November 17, 2008 9:17 PM
AlphavilleSG said...: Good news investors who loss their hard-earn cash!

Holland-Bukit Panjang and Pasir Ris-Punggol town councils have revealed that they lost a total of $12 million of YOUR money.

So ask your lawyers to call upon witness, the 11 PAP ministers who went in "with eyes wide open". ask why did they invest in these product, knowing so much risk at stake, since these are obviously not from the 'vulnerable' group but hand-pick high-calibre individual. Do they not have a role in protecting the sinking fund of the town council? Or did they not know? Had anyone been mis-sold?

The 11 MPs; November 17, 2008 9:31 PM
Anonymous said...: Well Said!; November 17, 2008 10:12 PM
Anonymous said...: Elected ministers are elected to protected the wealth of the country and CITIZEN. Taxpayers are looking up to ministers to find out why external FI could have penetrate the integrity of reputatable banking system in the country. The windup of L.Bros and spirial effect had sinked in individual investors, therefore as elected Government, they should console, sympathy and refrain from such statement. Instead, they should as united country, find way to take legal actions against US L. Bros..
When institution invest turn sour, they can cover up, written off and only known to a few, final results count. But when investors only FD lost and being lured-or - misguided, they will get angry and frustrated.
People trusted the FI reputation and being governed bankers , which was tainted with Cheat, misguided and diverted investment without proper protection of original FD.

Love your people like love your position. Don't slap them when their life hard earned saving are gone ....

I can feel it, even though we had withdrew all in 2004...2006;
Now we seldom go to OXXC premier club..and saving is at minimum....

From banks documentation, someone must be able to track and link up all the CEOs meeting, FIND out The MAster of all the masters...; November 17, 2008 10:20 PM
Anonymous said...: Hi Mr. Tan ,

Let us re-visit some of those statements :

1. “ ......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 ....”

2. “ ....many educated and young investors went into the Lehman-linked structured products with 'their eyes open'....”

3. “ ....SINGAPOREANS aggrieved by their investment in Lehman Minibonds and DBS High Notes 5 will have their complaints handled 'fairly and properly'….”

You can quote these ‘classic statements’ in yr new book.; November 17, 2008 10:25 PM
kilroy said...: Actually only five ministers have commented publicly on the issue. They are MM,SM,PM, the two Ministers of Finance. The other ministers have not spoken. Do they feel also that since investors went in with their eyes opened the case is closed because MAS has ensured that all the necessary info was in the prospectus and pricing statement never mind if some investors were never given a copy of same or had all the complicated product structure and investment risks explained to them?; November 17, 2008 10:48 PM
Anonymous said...: I really wish to see all of the investors can group together and sue the bank.
It's only possible to let all investors get back some money by sue the bank together.
If the investors allow and agree the bank compensate case by case. Then, only those elderly who are above 62 yrs and non-educated are able to get back some money.

Thus, tell your bank loudly that you are going to sue them. Give them pressure.; November 17, 2008 11:06 PM
Anonymous said...: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/390407/1/.html

Actual loss is S$16 million from 14 PAP-run Town Councils. Out of these 14 TCs, 8 TCs are affected.

S$8 million (6.7% of sinking funds): Holland-Bukit Panjang TC

S$4 million (2.6% of sinking funds): Pasir Ris-Punggol TC

S$4 million combined (less than 1% of sinking funds for each TC) = Aljunied, Ang Mo Kio-Yio Chu Kang, Hong Kah, Marine Parade, Tampines and Tanjong Pagar Town Councils; November 17, 2008 11:07 PM
CC said...: It takes courage to speak the truth and to stand up for what is right.

May the truth prevail.

CC; November 17, 2008 11:36 PM
Anonymous said...: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/390407/1/.html

"It (Holland-Bukit Panjang TC) had invested another S$3 million in Pinnacle Notes Series 6, but this investment was unaffected."

Pinnacle Notes Series 6 value, as at 14 Nov 08, stands at 2.95% (USD) or 1.26% (SGD).

http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/2008/11/pinnacle-notes-value-as-at-14-nov-2008.html

If this S$3 million investment loss is realized for Pinnalce Notes Series 6, then Holland-Bukit Panjang TC will face a loss of S$11 million (9.2% of its sinking funds).

Thus full investment loss for all 14 PAP-run TCs may eventually balloon up to S$19 million.

Food-for-thought.; November 18, 2008 12:01 AM
Anonymous said...: People who made loose comments - that investors invested with their eyes open - were not commenting objectively. They failed to take into account the many other factors involved, including of course misrepresentations of facts. These people were so myopic that they could not properly see the picture right in front of them. Investors went with their eyes open but they were fed false or wrong information by the RM who attended to them. So the blame must fall on the RM and/or their organization.

It is dangerous for anyone, ministers included, to make comments without weighing the facts or taking into account all relevant factors. The facts will make them look silly.; November 18, 2008 12:02 AM
Anonymous said...: Dear all,

Senior Minister of State for National Development and Education Grace Fu told Parliament that totally 14 PAP-run town councils have invested in Lehman-linked structured products. These town councils are Tanjong Pagar, Marine Parade, Ang Mo Kio-Yio Chu Kang, Aljunied, Holland-Bukit Panjang, PasirRis-Punggol ....

Are these town councils mis-led into investing their sinking funds in ‘low-risk corporate bonds’? Or they invested ‘with wide open eyes’ in these ‘high risk structured products‘?

Are the leaders of these constituencies been informed that their sinking funds been invested in these ‘Lehman-linked structured products‘?; November 18, 2008 12:18 AM
Anonymous said...: Now we must certainly question who are these highly paid talents who made such foolish decisions in spite of their top education and handpicked by the best of the best. This is simply unacceptable to be losing residents hard earned money in speculative high risk on a table of 9 kind of investments. If we put a donkey to make the decision to invest, we will not be losing this money.; November 18, 2008 12:30 AM
Anonymous said...: HOw can they admit that they were misled that would be slapping the ministers who said about "with eyes open", "high return high risk", 'investors can make informed decision" etc etc. Bite the bullets and 'confess' they misjudged and not misrepersnted and mis-sold by the banks.; November 18, 2008 12:33 AM
adego said...: It is very disturbing to see the public money going to drain... just like that!

It is even more disheartening to see our leaders, among them, has somebody who are financially trained, did not prevent such incident from happening...

The issue is not a matter if it is a 'small sum', it's about how prudent they handle the public money. And the next issue is about ACCOUNTABILITY.

This is another typical case to illustrate, if the crowd made the same mistake collectively, it is NOT really a BIG MISTAKE, it's just a small change, a small losses.

To some extent, it is a 'self-denial', to excuse oneself that, it is 'inevitable' to make mistake. Don't forget these are our leaders, and they have to be ACCOUNTABLE!

IT's simply an Unacceptable 'Mistake'!; November 18, 2008 12:43 AM
adego said...: who are the board of directors within the DBS group?

Are there any MP sitting on board?

who is the biggest shareholder of DBS?; November 18, 2008 12:48 AM
Anonymous said...: Quote:

If we either politicise the process or take an overly legalistic approach as opposed to this case-by-case evaluation in the financial institutions and FIDREC, there’s less likelihood that we get a fair outcome for investors.
Tharman
unquote
This is nothing new. It has been said by the ministers.It is threatening the investors. It is stalling for time. This will the most embarrassing episode for the garment. Confess the sins and shame the devil. Pay every investor in full and we forget that it has happened and then move on and pretend .; November 18, 2008 1:14 AM
Anonymous said...: Anon 9:17pm wrote : "The ministers will see it only when HK authorities take actions against the structured products and their sellers. Singapore's politicians like to follow others, to avoid risk of standing out like a sore thumb? They are followers, not leaders. If you understand this, you will be more calm and less angry".

If our politicians are followers and not leaders, why do we tax payers have to pay them million dollar salaries when their counterparts in HK get a much smaller compensation (and they are the real leaders). If you understand this, you will be more angry and less calm.

So it is high time to get imported talent from HK into our gahmen service !; November 18, 2008 3:23 AM
Anonymous said...: today is another gloomy day!; November 18, 2008 4:31 AM
Monsoon said...: What does it say about our country that except for exactly two person, Mr Tan Kin Lian, and Dr Money, there is no other fair minded person of prominance who will come out and speak for the people who has been missold or mislead by the FI into investing in minibonds and othr similar product.

Almost every intellectuals, every other leaders in all sphere of our lives has kept quiet? Mr Ngiam Tong Dow? Professor Tommy Koh? Mr Philip Yeo? Dr Lee Wei Ling? President Nathan? Ms Susan Long? Mr Cherian George? Ms Catherine Lim? our MPs? or perhaps they are all quietly working behind the scene like the MAS is trying to help the investors?

All the establishment figures who has spoken has so far unwaveringly sing the same tune, "greedy", "Buyers beware" "eyes open"; November 18, 2008 6:49 AM
Anonymous said...: Now you see the danger of monopoly of opinion. History is repeating itself. Remember Mao Tse Tung's China? Any dissenting and prominant party member saw his political life ended traumatically.; November 18, 2008 10:36 AM
siewkhim said...: They talk like that because they have superior financial and powerful political and military backing.

What do the victims and Kin Lian and Dr Money have? They have only fighting spirits and unselfish means to help. These are not enough to rock the FIs.; November 18, 2008 10:57 AM
Anonymous said...: Who knows maybe these town councils already got back the full return of their monies. You think they will just let the matter rest. It's the government you know THE GOVERNMENT. All they need is to just write a letter to the bank. They may not dare to spill the bean out for fear others may also wants the bank to return the full amount. The bank will not dare to offend THE GOVERNMENT.; November 18, 2008 3:42 PM
Anonymous said...: It is a good sign that one more voice has joined Mr Tan and dare speaking some truth about this mini bond saga.But I wondered what take Dr Money so long to act ? It will be definitely bring much more public awareness on this issue if more reporters start to follow Dr Money's footstep. But of course, by speaking the truth like Mr Tan and Dr Money, else, more prople will be misled, which has been the case with local media till Dr Money spoke !; November 18, 2008 3:59 PM
Anonymous said...: Just wonder if the fund which TCs invested in the CLNs was from the pool for fixed return or the 35% part that can be invested into stocks and bonds. As far as I know, the risk level of stocks and bonds range from 3-8 out of 10, while the risk level of HN5 is 8-9 out of 10. Is there any risk constraints on TCs' investment?

To be fair, I think the leaders of the TCs are innocent, and may even had a good motivation to invest in these products.

It's the issuers and MAS which mis-designed the products and the FIs which mis-matched TCs' interest with the products. Therefore, the FIs should refund the TCs without any conditional terms.

XH; November 18, 2008 6:10 PM
Anonymous said...: brace for increase in conservancy..; November 18, 2008 8:06 PM
Anonymous said...: The answer is very simple, our Town Councilers, like many of us were also misled by the FIs and thought that that the product are bond fund, capital protected, very safe.

Unless they are mad, they should have not put in the money if they were told all the risks from the outset.

Just do not know if the FIs have done any risk analysis with the TCs? And what is the scores?; November 18, 2008 11:06 PM
Anonymous said...: If bank compensation is only for uneducated elderly above 62 yrs, what about the 61 yrs and younger and also their families. Which sort of logic is this? Uneducated investors of above 62 yrs would never understand the product, they properly favour 4D/TOTO/BIG SWEEP, much much much more higher return!
Have you placed your bet already?

Thus, tell your bank loudly that you are going to sue them. Give them pressure.; November 19, 2008 12:35 AM
Anonymous said...: Government say treat each case separately to be fair:

"Vulnerable" - they get 100% compensated since they are old and uneducated

"Town Councils" - they get 100% since they are PAP

"MAS, IDA, SLA, PEB, SCSC - they get 100% since they are gahmen stat boards

"Rest" - you get nothing since you went in with "eyes open"

Now you know why they insist case by case.; November 19, 2008 9:00 AM
Anonymous said...: I have 2 questions for the Town Councils:

1. At the time of purchase of the Minibonds, High 5 Notes etc., do you truely believe that you were investing in some safe, low risk products with a 5% returns?

If YES, now that is is revealed that these are very high risk investment products associated with unregulated CDOs, do you feel that you have been misled and that these products were misrepresented and missold?

2. If NO, then you knew that these were high risk investment products and yet chose to risk sinking fund for a mere 5% returns. Is this then not reckless (or greedy as some would say)? What worries me is the level of intelligence that goes into making these investment decisions.; November 19, 2008 11:30 AM
Anonymous said...: Actually the blunder (to be charitable) by the town councils over the minibond investments is quite serious. The town council officials include elected memembers of parliament whose primary responisbility is not to a political party but the electorate who put them into office. Dr Teo Ho Ping has said, residents should be grateful that the town council invests otherwise residents would have to pay more fees. Maybe. It is certainly true though the Dr Teo should be grateful to the citizens/residents who elected him. They do not ask for much merely for some accountability over their money. Is this too much, I wonder?; November 20, 2008 12:14 AM
Anonymous said...: Can the Singapore National Flag printed on the bannerette of a Clubabove or beside the Club's logo?; August 07, 2009 9:00 PM

Monday, November 17, 2008

None Are So Blind As Those Who Will Not See The Truth

41 comments:

Blog Archive