Tan Kin Lian's Blog: Pinnacle Notes 9 and 10

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Pinnacle Notes 9 and 10

Read my blog dated November 2007, when the product was first advertised:

http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/2007/11/pinnacle-notes-series-9-10.html

6 comments:

Lucky Tan said...: When the Pinnacle Notes were launched, subpriem problem had already started and some of the CDOs fell by 30-50% (market price) by Nov 2007.

I wonder if the American banks sold them at face value or market price to Singaporeans?

In any case, the banks already knew that these were becoming worthless as the market for these securities were becoming illiquid.

If they simply repackage such junk and sell to Singaporeans...they are out to cheat. Plain and simple. The MAS allowing these products to slip in, allowed Singaporeans to be cheated.; November 18, 2008 6:53 AM
Anonymous said...: Can everyone just buy 1 lot of DBS share and then attend DBS's AGM? Will that be easier to talk to the higher ups?; November 18, 2008 8:09 AM
Tan Kin Lian said...: Hi luckysingaporean,

Only the authority or Government has the power to check if the CDOs were sold to the note holders at the devalued, fair market price or at their over-valued original price.

The purpose of Petition #1 was to ask the authority to carry out this investigation.

So far, I have not heard if they intend to carry out the investigation. One month has passed.

This reflects poorly on the transparency standard of our government.; November 18, 2008 8:35 AM
Anonymous said...: can anyone tell me what role does a reference entity has in this structured note and how are the underlying investments determined?; November 18, 2008 2:43 PM
Anonymous said...: Dear Kin Lian

I am holder of PS9. If all the S'pore holders of PS9 lost their money, who is/are the counterparty that gained? As I understand it, this is a zero-sum game. We S'poreans lost and someone else gained at our expense.

My reason for asking is related to the post by luckysingaporean and your reply - what prices were the CDOs sold? - devalued, fair market price or over-valued original price?

What is there to prevent MS and/or its asociates from being the beneficiaries through manipulation - either by deliberating populating the CDO list with entities that are in the midst of defaulting and/or selling the CDOs at unfair over-valued original prices.

The MAS is sticking to its position that there is nothing wrong with PS9 as an investment product. That it is Caveat Emptor. This is arguable (Caveat Emptor works only if there is transparency and full disclosure) and is not the main point. The main point is there could be parties manipulating and a thorough investigation by an independent third party is absolutely necessary, such as those of the US Senate hearings into the financial collapse of US banks and insurance companies.

While the MAS is now saying that it will investigate the selling, marketing and post-sales process to ensure that there is no breach of regulations and mis-selling, it could be blindsided to manipulation in the CDOs market, which on its own is highly unregulated.; November 19, 2008 12:14 AM
Anonymous said...: I didn't know I became an "insurance agent" with the purchase of PN10!? The FA should have told me that!

http://www.lioninvestor.com/pinnacle-notes-9-and-10-default/#comment-4646; November 19, 2008 6:44 PM