Tan Kin Lian's Blog: Land banking report in TODAY

Friday, June 11, 2010

Land banking report in TODAY

Hi Mr. Tan,

http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC100611-0000267/Investors-call-for-regulation-of-land-banking

Quote:
Ex-NTUC Income chief executive Tan Kin Lian, who has blogged extensively about land banking, told MediaCorp that any product sold as an investment should be regulated - especially if it is advertised through the media to the general public.
Unquote

HL

11 comments:

Anonymous said...: I hope that the LAND BANKING industry practise can be totally exposed with full transparency, instead of some claiming they are 'legitimate'. I know a lot of investors are affected some with investments in Canada etc. Hope something can be done to curb the 'sellers' some are licensed FA Rep. Is this allowed??; June 11, 2010 5:47 PM
Unknown said...: "Responding to a letter to Today querying if companies on the list should be allowed to advertise, Ms Lily Tay, executive director of Singapore Advertisers Association, said the list only warns consumers that they will not be protected under the law if they deal with these unregulated companies."

I think what she is saying in the article is It is not our responsibility if we advertise scams and frauds even if we've been advised about it by regulators or the public.

If you allow industries to self regulate they always regulate in favour of revenue and profit. Advertising in Singapore clearly needs to come under some independent control.; June 11, 2010 9:17 PM
Anonymous said...: What to do, we live in Singapore. When there is money to make and nothing wrong all go in even knowing that there is potential danger. No one want to take the step to make it right from start. All want to make money and do fire fighting and finger pointing later. This is really our culture being uniquely singapore. Very sad; June 11, 2010 9:46 PM
Woodstock said...: Mr Mr Tan,

I share your passion in helping the average retail investors seek justice in their investment.

Landbanking falls between real estate and CIS which i makes it "grey". Can i write to you on my ideas on how to promote awareness/pitfalls ?

Thanks; June 11, 2010 9:56 PM
Tan Kin Lian said...: To woodstock

write to kinlian@gmail.com; June 12, 2010 7:33 AM
Anonymous said...: MAS must be clear on how and when they will help retail investors. As long as they are not, they will always be seen by the victims as "useless", "good for nothing" and "only know how to ask for pay increase and did nothing"

MAS can shortlist companies as not regulated or fraud but does it means these companies can continue to promote and misrepresent fraudulent investment products?

Example: Numerous people complained about misrepresentation of landbanking product but MAS consider it as "None of MAS Business".

MAS should learn from British Regulator's Model which recently closes a landbanking company.

Doing nothing and ignoring the public victimization in this product will only allow the public to conclude that MAS is really good for nothing. Next round request for pay increase will only add anger to the public that MAS is a self-interest and only know how to add $ to their salary but don't know how to do its job!; June 12, 2010 9:11 AM
Anonymous said...: Any investments should be done with careful studying of the company structure. Quick 'promising' returns in 16 months is definitely suspicious and to be carefully monitored. There are few bad firms and good firms. So please choose wisely.
I believe this has led to the upsets and thus so called regulations to be in place.; June 12, 2010 12:02 PM
symmetrix said...: Referring to the report in TODAY dated 11-Jun which stated:-

"Responding to a letter to Today querying if companies on the list should be allowed to advertise, Ms Lily Tay, executive director of Singapore Advertisers Association, said the list only warns consumers that they will not be protected under the law if they deal with these unregulated companies."

Flwg the above logic, then cigarette advertising should be allowed in the media as long as there is a clear warning and disclaimer in bold print that smoking is hazardous to health. Let the consumer decide if he wishes to buy cigarettes.

After all, cigarettes are legal products yet they cannot be advertised in any form. One the other hand you have crooked unregulated products that can be advertised freely albeit with disclaimers. Why is the govt having double standards on advertising policies? Perhaps it is due to smoking being a danger to your health. But investing in unregulated products is a danger to your pocket !!!

I recommend that the govt consider banning advertising of all unregulated products that are harmful to the ppl, if it truly has the interests of its ppl at heart. No, I am not promoting a nanny state.; June 12, 2010 11:23 PM
Anonymous said...: dubious investment needs to be taken off the field...; June 13, 2010 2:01 AM
Anonymous said...: Investors need to do their own research. Don't always expect the authorities to save the investor.; June 14, 2010 8:51 AM
Jay said...: Remember I wrote a email to you about my email to ST and the response from their editor.

I always wonder about the reponsiblility of ST to their readers.; June 15, 2010 10:55 AM