Wednesday, July 08, 2009
Ban on selling structured notes
A journalist told me that the ban imposed by MAS is from selling structured notes. The ban does not apply to other types of structured products. Frankly, I do not understand the distinction. Can anyone enlighten me? What kind of structured products are not covered by the ban?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(1555)
-
►
November
(157)
- Emergency jobs program
- Location map - fast and easy
- Keynesian Economics
- False wealth
- Get Ready for Half a Recovery
- EPL matches for 2010
- Buy term insurance directly through internet porta...
- Termination of Living Policy
- Life insurance can serve a useful purpose
- Payout under CPF Life
- Family Income Benefit
- Keep cash, and be safe
- New immigrant's loyalty to Singapore
- An alternative to the free market economy
- Confucianism
- Pension planning
- Economic problems of Ireland
- Dubai is unable to repay its debts
- Ideals of communism
- Communism - theory and practice
- Misleading arguments by life insurance agents
- Watch out for signs of a bad financial adviser
- Review of existing life policy
- SCMP:Objections to new rules on minibonds look fli...
- Over reliance on ratings
- Tax burden around the world
- Level the playing field
- Survey: EPL matches on Pay TV
- Quality of service
- Loss of human touch
- Lending to small businesses
- Zero interest rate
- Common Sense Investing - John Bogle
- Credit card bills
- Recession and opportunity to change
- Excellent train service in UK
- Oligopoly
- New York Times to Goldman Sachs
- Low interest rate
- Motley Fool
- Better citizens
- Bailout of AIG
- Full employment and welfare state
-
▼
July
(192)
- Great Eastern Announces One-time Redemption Offer ...
- SCMP:Investors set for legal fight over lost milli...
- Features of life insurance policies
- Coops in focus in US healthcare debate
- Aging, inequity and poverty
- Expensive car park in Singapore
- Health care realities
- The Health Debate: At a Fever Pitch
- Permits required to appeal to the public for funds...
- Petition to PM on credit linked note (6)
- Pelosi lashes out against insurance companies
- Promote the use of car sharing
- No parking space in HDB estates
- Online Donation towards Gathering on 22 August
- Waiting for the stockmarket to bottom
- BBC; Car insurance premiums rising
- Are you sure democracy cannot help you financially...
- 50% compensation for Minibond
- Company Y not wanting to pay out my insurance clai...
- Gathering on 22 August at Hong Lim Park (2)
- Books and puzzles
- The Standard:Bank wiped out my $260m
- NJ sues Merrill Lynch over $300 mln stock purchase...
- Work near your home
- For the benefit and welfare of the people
- Honesty in Politics
- What is the future for this country?
- Free market - success and failure
- Reuters: Investors dump brokers to go it alone onl...
- NY Times: Of banks and bonuses
- Lehman victims international/ planning for Sep. 15...
- Why markets can't cure health care
- The Standard:61pc of minibond investors undecided ...
- TODAY:We should follow HK's example ; Protect indi...
- Honesty and fairness
- SCMP:Monetary Authority director clarifies minibon...
- Advice on individual shares
- Pensioner Health Benefits
- Interest rate on 25 July 2009
- Winners of Intelligence Quiz and Name The Shape co...
- Develop your mind
- SCMP:Lehman inquiry to call SFC chief again
- Broadcast this message: Petition
- Cheated in a good reputation country
- Where the jobs are
- Health care systems around the world
- Journalists refused to cover the Petition
- Unsightly flyover in the center of town
- Pinnacle Notes - many series in trouble
- CPF Life - does it need to be compulsory?
- SCMP:Minibond decision heartens investors similarl...
- The Standard:Protests ease, investors come to term...
- China Daily:Investors continue minibond fight
- Parliament Answers to Lehman Structure Products - ...
- SCMP:Some sympathy for the devils
- CPF Life
- Coverage of HK settlement
- Minimum wage spurs optimism and debate
- The Emperor's Clothes and Singapore
- SCMP:How swift lobbying ended a dispute that had d...
- SCMP:Legco inquiry to proceed despite agreement on...
- SCMP:The right rules, and the facts to invest prud...
- The Standard:Deal tones down minibond anger
- The Standard:Nightmare nears end
- Blog: Diary of a Singapore Mind
- Help Minibond investors to secure the collateral
- Petition to Prime Minister (5)
- Survey Results: The Emperor's Clothes
- Interesting puzzle
- Q&A US Health Reform
- In South Korea, a new worker's grievance
- SFC, HKMA and 16 banks reach agreement on Minibond...
- The Petition is NOT a futile effort
- Gathering in Hong Lim Park on 22 Aug 09
- Minibond - misconceptions and unfair criticisms
- NY Times: Temasek scraps plan for American chief
- SCMP:Investors want full refund, not 70pc
- Bloomberg: HK banks agree to repurchase Lehman Min...
- Investing in gold
- Investing in a property for rental
- Bird Nest Industry in Kedah, Malaysia
- Personal accident insurance
- Existing whole life policy
- Winners of MySudoku contest
- A Collosal Failure of Common Sense
- Petition to Prime Minister (4)
- NMP Siew Kum Hong expresses his views on the credi...
- SCMP:Treat us the same as minibondvictims, say Oct...
- The Standard:Banks facing China claims
- Kedah, Malaysia
- Petition to Prime Minister (3)
- Financial invention vs Consumer Protection
- SCMP: Clear up the mess
- 6 day detox programme (3)
- TODAY: On the issue of responsibility
- MySudoku Contest 17 July
- Petition to Prime Minister (2)
- Shape Quiz book is now ready
- 6 day detox programme (2)
- When do you say the Emperor has no clothes
- SCMP:Cleaning up the mess after a big player falls...
- SCMP:Tsang's disapproval rating at record high
- Earthquake and tsunami
- Singapore GIC, Temasek, and Transparency
- 6 day detox programme
- True cost of life assurance
- Financial consumers need new watchdog: Obama admin...
- The New Paper:The real problem? Underwriters hidin...
- Petition to the Prime Minister
- MySudoku Contest 10 July 2009
- Logic9 (Sudoku pocket books)
- Maximise shareholder value
- Low interest rate
- Tiered interest rate
- Ask for investigation report through FIDREC
- The Emperor's Clothes
- Brain Workout in The New Paper
- Serangoon North HUDC Privatisation
- Idling ships clog up Singapore shores
- Rebuttals to editorial in Straits Times
- Issues not addressed by MAS investigation findings...
- Law Suit on DBS High Notes
- Coverage of Lehman cases in Hong Kong
- MySudoku Contest in MyPaper
- A fair solution to the toxic product crisis
- Part Time Work Portal
- Name the Shape Contest
- TKL Intelligence Quiz Contest
- The Standard:Ip supports banks' offer in minibond ...
- Relevance of Animal Farm
- Tyranny and liberty
- Cheyenne does Shape Quiz (2)
- SCMP:SFC does not need to complete all minibond in...
- SCMP:Chief keeps quiet over calls for his resignat...
- A Doctor by Choice, a Businessman by Necessity
- Ban on selling structured notes
- Let your views be heard
- Gathering at Speaker's Corner, 22 Aug at 5 pm
- Section 27 of Financial Adviser's Act
- A fair compensation
- Follow up action on MAS investigation report
- The Standard:Illegal Lehman protest targets Tsang ...
- Singapore bars 10 firms from selling structured no...
- MAS Investigation Findings
- 100 fun and information personality quizzes
- Simplify Internet Banking
- Prevent Mis-selling of Financial Products
- Funds Transfer
- Diverse Views
- A poor return on savings in life insurance
- A note of encouragement
- No-fault motor insurance
- Are we over-reacting to Influence A (H1N1)
- The hidden ugly side of Singapore
- Consumer Finance Protection Agency
- SCMP:Lehman investments recouped
- FISCA Research: Interest Rates on Savings Accounts...
- Cheyenne does the Shape Quiz (T Puzzle)
- Allow lawyers to act on contingency fee
- Automated car
- Gathering in Speaker's Corner in August (4)
- Mis-representation on Credit Linked Notes
- Can you solve these 4 shapes?
- Checks and balances
- ATE (After The Event) Insurance
- Credit cards availabe in Singapore as at 15 May 20...
- Fixed deposit interest rate as at 15 May 2009
- Is this negligence?
- Local Transport Service
- Create jobs to help recovery of Global Economy
- SCAM: A bounced cheque
- Request for another Petition to MAS
- Show of support?
- The Standard:New deal to settle minibond buyback
- Was there an attempt to cheat?
- Gathering at Speaker's Corner in August (3)
- Best use for electric car
- Invest in Singapore Government Securities
- What is cheating?
- Politics of Fear
- Australia: List the names of underlying securities...
- Best fixed deposit rates
- SCMP:Minibond victims try to storm bank in protest...
- MRT train lines to come under a single operator
- Cheating and negligence
- Vista Plan (from Zurich)
- Administration of Justice (2)
- Gathering in Speakers Corner
- Compensation should not solely be based on vulnera...
- SCMP:Policy chief expects march to reflect increas...
- Buying a property - facilities
- Administration of Justice (1)
-
►
November
(157)
18 comments:
Products sold by the banks are quite complicated and really need rocket science to understand.
Look at the latest product by POSB:
http://www.dbs.com.sg/posb/investments/singgrowth/Pages/default.aspx
I was approached by a marketeer last week with this brochure and literally with the "cookies" showing 2.78%.
I emailed Mr Tan a copy.
I could not understand what Clause 4 in the brochure is talking about.
I know upon if a Specified Redemption Event occurs from Year 2 onwards or around 8 Aug 2011 as mentioned in Clause 5, there will be Bonus payment, i.e. if Return of each share in the basket of blue chips is at or above 15% on the fixing date.
But I could not understand phrase in Clause 4 - ...where the Bank defaults, the Customer will receive zero interest payments and lose his original investment amount....
As usual we see the "naughty" disclaimers.
I wonder if this structured product is now "illegal" due to the current ban.
Toxic products should be ban forever!!!!!
Structured deposits are not covered.
C H Yak:
" ...where the Bank defaults, the Customer..."
The Bank refers to POSB, not Lehman or Goldman Sachs or what not foreign ones.
Do you think POSB will default?
Haha!
To "July 08, 2009 8:15 PM",
You may like to know that many banks in US have already collapsed and default. The bigger ones were not permitted to collapse but were rescued. Thus, banks defaulting and collapsing is not unthinkable.
Soon, IFRS will waive the requirement of companies to mark-to-market their assets. Thus, banks have become very dangerous animals.
The difference between the structured note and structured deposit is that the latter's counterparty is the bank itself. Thus if the bank default the "deposit" is gone. The issue is that how "senior" the structured deposit is in terms of the investors claim on the banks' asset is not disclosed. For all you know, investors of structured deposits are the last to be able to claim on the assets of the bank if the bank collapsed. Moreover, a structured deposit is not insured by the SDIC.
An insider.
If you are tempted by these products that pay a bit more than your patlry fixed Deposit, but do not quite understand the product, my advice is:
WHEN IN DOUBT, DON'T!
Speaking as a "burnt" invenstor.
Dear Mr Tan,
"A major difference is that a bank offering a structured deposit is obliged to repay investors their deposit in full when it matures - a key feature of any deposit - while a structured note is similar to a bond, where the bank selling the product may not be legally obliged to ensure that investors recover their money."
source: http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/sub/news/story/0,4574,340998,00.html?
(Banks' reputations bruised, but profits intact in BT 9 Jul 2009)
I don't even be bored to read any products they are promoting now. THey are liers in my eyes.
If Anonymous 5:04 AM's quote from BT is correct, then something must be wrong with Clause 4 of the POSB brochure, where it mentions that the Customer may lose his original investment amount, i.e. the Principal.
Quote
The customer will receive the full principal at maturity or upon Specified Redemption Event, unless in the worst case scenario, where the Bank defaults, the Customer will receive zero interest payments and lose his original investment amount. Any early withdrawal by the Customer may result in the Customer receiving substantially less than the principal amount invested.
Unquote
And if the Bank is also the counterparty, then the drafting of this clause by the Bank is questionable, even though in a possible dispute the Contra Proferendum rule may be applied against it.
If the Bank defaults but default on what?
The clauses are for the banks and lawyers to understand and then protect themselves.
As a layman, I do not understand much. Yes, I admit my language is lousy.
The clause refers to that of POSB going bust.
After what happened to Lehman, the bank now has to put in this clause to make sure all the risks is disclosed upfront.
Does the selling of structured products ban extend to POSB?
Lion Investor,
The ban is for notes, not deposit. POSB is selling the latter.
Can someone pls differentiate between Structured Notes and Structured Deposits?
Reading thru POSB Invest SingGrowth Account's features on their website at http://www.dbs.com.sg/posb/investments/singgrowth/Pages/default.aspx , it is also linked to performance of certain entities. Early redemption occurs upon certain events, and it appears advantageous to the investor when that happens.
What if any of the 4 reference entities goes bust during the tenor period? Will the product terminate (with bonus payout) or continue to maturity (without bonus payout)? Nothing is mentioned about this. Something is strange about this product. It sure isn't structured like Lehman Minibonds.
Very fishy. The best thing to do it not to buy. All these mind boggling terms are very hard to understand. But when things go wrong, they will be highlighted and used against us.
Personally after the "burnt n still burning experience", I rather sleep easy with my money (though earning very pathetic interest) than worry about another possible toxic bomb.
The 2.78% is definitely not worth the potential high risk.... I also understood that the interest dropped after the 1st year. So all the more, pls exercise extreme caution before buying. The "return" does not justify the known/hidden risks involved.
there is a wide variety of financial pdts in the market. be v sure about the pdt u intend to purchase. if in doubt, nva make a rash decision.
STRUCTURED DEPOSITS are usually capital gtd. it is similar to fixed deposits but structured by the individual bank, in terms of maturity term, interest scheme etc. structured deposits generally have a maturity term of 3 or 5 years with capital gtd upon maturity or early closure by the bank. interest is usually higher but based on market performance (capital amount is unaffected). most structured deposits give a gtd 1st year interest of 2.5% and above, the following years' interest will depend on the market performance and may be zero interest in worst case scenario.
STRUCTURED PRODUCTS are an entirely different classification, offering attractive interest with a level of risk n product complexity. structured products are generally not capital gtd, even if u hold it till maturity. such products are viewed as investment products for better returns n should not be used as a savings plan. there are many types of structured products.
STRUCTURED NOTES are well-exemplified by DBS High Notes, Minibonds n Pinnacle Notes. They are usually moderate to high risk products offering attractive returns as compared to fixed deposits. It falls under the umbrella of structured products, given that it is definitely not capital gtd n can result in a total loss of capital in the worst case scenario.
The MAS ban was on structured notes. The banks n FIs are still able to continue selling other structured products, unit trust, insurance products, structured deposits, fixed deposits n savings etc.
dolphin_ice,
Tks for explanation of the 3 types of Structured investments.
What is the true reason for POSB to launch Invest SingGrowth, now? Surely it does not need the cash as it is filthy rich. It does not say how it is planning to use the funds raised. Is POSB trying to make amends for the screw ups of DBS?
The only risk I see is when POSB goes bust (unlikely) in which case investors lose their principal. Failure of any of the 4 underlying entities also does not constitute a Specified Redemption Event. The annual Fixed Payouts are not subject to market nor performance factors. No other risk is mentioned. So, if one is happy with 7.7% interest over 5 yrs, isn't this "safe" product a good deal? Or is it too good to be true?
This is POSB's own product. Why would POSB want to pay more interest on this product when it is already paying paltry interest to millions of customers? I suspect there is an ulterior motive behind this product but I can't put a finger on it.
Hi VS Lingam, For that kind of interest (7.7%/5 years =1.54% p.a), it does not seem like a good deal when you have to worry about all the what ifs for 5 years over the palty interest. why risk it?
Post a Comment