• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

DBS Hi-Notes: We Didn't Con You. Just That U STOOPID! *hee*hee*

makapaaa

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>High Notes saga: DBS Bank won't gain
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->WE REFER to Mrs Rebecca Lee's letter on Wednesday, ('High Notes saga: Tell us who gains, who loses out and why'), and wish to address her concerns here.
DBS High Notes 5 is a 5.5-year structured, credit-linked note designed for investors seeking enhanced yield by providing exposure to a 'First to Default' (FTD) basket of geographically diversified investment grade credits consisting of eight Reference Entities (RE). High Notes 5 is not a 'low risk' product; it was clearly highlighted that in the worst case scenario, the investor could lose the entire investment amount. The structure and risk of the product was documented in the Pricing Statement which we gave to all our customers when they made their investments in High Notes 5.
As part of our investment sales process, we conduct a financial needs analysis to help us understand our customers' financial objectives, investment time horizon, risk-tolerance level and financial situation. In addition, a manager also calls every customer who is 62 years and above to confirm their understanding of the product. Our relationship managers are always available to answer questions about the investment, and where the questions are of a technical nature, our product experts are consulted.
When Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., which was one of the eight REs, filed for bankruptcy protection on Sept 15, a credit event occurred in High Notes 5. This triggered the early termination of the Note as Lehman Brothers was one of the eight entities in the FTD Basket in High Notes 5. We have since been in constant contact, be it via phone, e-mail or face-to-face meetings with customers who have purchased investment products with exposure to Lehman.
DBS will act expeditiously as we unwind the Note. The final amount to be paid to the customer will be based on a formula that has been highlighted in the Pricing Statement. DBS will not benefit in this process. To provide added assurance that the bank will act in the customers' best interests, in addition to the bank's compliance and audit processes, DBS will also be appointing independent external consultants to review complaint handling and the final credit event redemption amount.
We thank Mrs Lee for giving us an opportunity to clarify this matter with her. Janet Mohan (Ms)
Vice-President
Customer Feedback & Service Management
Consumer Banking Group
DBS Bank
 

makapaaa

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=heading>Latest comments</TD></TR><TR><TD id=messageDisplayRegion width="100%"><TABLE style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE class=Post style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>Because of the "little" commission banks earn from selling these products, the depositors now have lost all of his/her hard earned money. Very tragic. Bankers are earning so much money so easily but not the usual depositor.
</TD></TR><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>Posted by: chowsungdurian at Fri Sep 26 20:31:12 SGT 2008
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE class=AlternatePost style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>Is the MAS prepared to disclosed how much in total was invested in these Notes?
</TD></TR><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>Posted by: NELNELNEL at Fri Sep 26 16:52:27 SGT 2008
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE class=Post style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>Tan Kin Lian's Blog
Friday, September 26, 2008
Draft of Petition to Singapore Government

I have asked a lawyer to help me to prepare this Petition. I hope to get the views of the investors.

PETITION TO SINGAPORE GOVERNMENT

1. We write to petition the Singapore Government, particularly the Commercial Affairs Department (Singapore Police Force) and/or the Monetary Authority of Singapore, to conduct a full and independent inquiry in relation to the credit linked securities sold by various financial institutions in Singapore. These structured products include the Lehman Minibonds, DBS High Notes 5 and Merrill Lynch Jubilee Series 3 LinkEarner Notes.

2. Singaporeans, including the persons who have signed this petition, lost their hard-earned savings by investing in these financial products. Such products clearly did not suit the risk profiles of these consumers. The consumers were not made aware of the high risks involved in the financial product when buying the product. They became innocent victims of misrepresentation by the financial institutions that distributed the structured products.

3. We now wish to be assured that those who invested in such financial products have not been victims of negligent and/or dishonest conduct and/or fraud by these financial institutions.

4. The Government has a duty to ensure that investment products are marketed and sold appropriately in our jurisdiction. Such products must be sold in a manner compliant with the laws of Singapore. Financial institutions, including their respective key management, that do not follow the laws or regulations applicable to them must be held accountable for such breaches.

5. Please commence a full and independent inquiry into the sale of structured products by various financial institutions in Singapore. If the inquiry deems necessary, the Attorney-General of Singapore should act against these financial institutions.

6. We also ask the Government to help these investors to claim fair and adequate compensation from these financial institutions for their losses which are caused by the mis-conduct of these financial institutions.

7. We ask the Government to act now and restore the peoples' faith in our financial system.

Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 9:59 AM
http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/
</TD></TR><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>Posted by: mettakaruna at Fri Sep 26 16:47:07 SGT 2008
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE class=AlternatePost style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>The notion that the product provides an exposure to an FtD basket of geographically diversified investment grade credits consisting of eight Reference Entities is slightly misleading. In an FtD structure, a default on a single reference entity is sufficient to trigger a massive loss to its investors. In fact, diversification of the reference entities would increase the probability that any single entity within the basket defaulting, i.e. early termination of the note. By not diversifying, for example by focusing all reference entities on a single sector, the probability of all the reference entities not defaulting together is higher, i.e. higher chance of no credit event occurring. Well, the probability of all reference entities defaulting at the same time is as well higher, but since it is a first to default structure, it doesn't matter.
Hence, for this structure, diversifying the basket unnecessarily increases the risk to the investors.
</TD></TR><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>Posted by: graninho at Fri Sep 26 16:45:15 SGT 2008
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE class=Post style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>I do believe that DBS won't gain a lot from High notes 5 because they failed the gambling.

To assess whether DBS gain or lot, the first question is how much DBS would gain if there were no credit events, compared with the gain of the customers? How much DBS would lose now that the credit event occurred, compared with the loss of the customers?

Seems DBS included all the risks in the pricing statement and base prospectus, but in a way no one will really understand before the credit event occurred. even today, most RMs will get confused, how can they explain all the risks at the time of selling the product? how can customers?
</TD></TR><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>Posted by: Hatebank at Fri Sep 26 16:21:04 SGT 2008
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
 

Tiu-leh-see-fart

Alfrescian
Loyal
Why Tan kin lian like that?

he was a PAP man before and serve Lee Kuan Yew well.

howcome now turn against Govt?

PAP govt never gun point at investors, banks' programmes are mainly for the interest of the bank ,where got do loogee business. PAP treats him so well, he should fight for PAP and not for the fools.





<TABLE cellSpacing=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=heading>Latest comments</TD></TR><TR><TD id=messageDisplayRegion width="100%"><TABLE style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE class=Post style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>Because of the "little" commission banks earn from selling these products, the depositors now have lost all of his/her hard earned money. Very tragic. Bankers are earning so much money so easily but not the usual depositor.
</TD></TR><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>Posted by: chowsungdurian at Fri Sep 26 20:31:12 SGT 2008
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE class=AlternatePost style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>Is the MAS prepared to disclosed how much in total was invested in these Notes?
</TD></TR><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>Posted by: NELNELNEL at Fri Sep 26 16:52:27 SGT 2008
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE class=Post style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>Tan Kin Lian's Blog
Friday, September 26, 2008
Draft of Petition to Singapore Government

I have asked a lawyer to help me to prepare this Petition. I hope to get the views of the investors.

PETITION TO SINGAPORE GOVERNMENT

1. We write to petition the Singapore Government, particularly the Commercial Affairs Department (Singapore Police Force) and/or the Monetary Authority of Singapore, to conduct a full and independent inquiry in relation to the credit linked securities sold by various financial institutions in Singapore. These structured products include the Lehman Minibonds, DBS High Notes 5 and Merrill Lynch Jubilee Series 3 LinkEarner Notes.

2. Singaporeans, including the persons who have signed this petition, lost their hard-earned savings by investing in these financial products. Such products clearly did not suit the risk profiles of these consumers. The consumers were not made aware of the high risks involved in the financial product when buying the product. They became innocent victims of misrepresentation by the financial institutions that distributed the structured products.

3. We now wish to be assured that those who invested in such financial products have not been victims of negligent and/or dishonest conduct and/or fraud by these financial institutions.

4. The Government has a duty to ensure that investment products are marketed and sold appropriately in our jurisdiction. Such products must be sold in a manner compliant with the laws of Singapore. Financial institutions, including their respective key management, that do not follow the laws or regulations applicable to them must be held accountable for such breaches.

5. Please commence a full and independent inquiry into the sale of structured products by various financial institutions in Singapore. If the inquiry deems necessary, the Attorney-General of Singapore should act against these financial institutions.

6. We also ask the Government to help these investors to claim fair and adequate compensation from these financial institutions for their losses which are caused by the mis-conduct of these financial institutions.

7. We ask the Government to act now and restore the peoples' faith in our financial system.

Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 9:59 AM
http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/
</TD></TR><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>Posted by: mettakaruna at Fri Sep 26 16:47:07 SGT 2008
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE class=AlternatePost style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>The notion that the product provides an exposure to an FtD basket of geographically diversified investment grade credits consisting of eight Reference Entities is slightly misleading. In an FtD structure, a default on a single reference entity is sufficient to trigger a massive loss to its investors. In fact, diversification of the reference entities would increase the probability that any single entity within the basket defaulting, i.e. early termination of the note. By not diversifying, for example by focusing all reference entities on a single sector, the probability of all the reference entities not defaulting together is higher, i.e. higher chance of no credit event occurring. Well, the probability of all reference entities defaulting at the same time is as well higher, but since it is a first to default structure, it doesn't matter.
Hence, for this structure, diversifying the basket unnecessarily increases the risk to the investors.
</TD></TR><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>Posted by: graninho at Fri Sep 26 16:45:15 SGT 2008
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left><TABLE class=Post style="WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>I do believe that DBS won't gain a lot from High notes 5 because they failed the gambling.

To assess whether DBS gain or lot, the first question is how much DBS would gain if there were no credit events, compared with the gain of the customers? How much DBS would lose now that the credit event occurred, compared with the loss of the customers?

Seems DBS included all the risks in the pricing statement and base prospectus, but in a way no one will really understand before the credit event occurred. even today, most RMs will get confused, how can they explain all the risks at the time of selling the product? how can customers?
</TD></TR><TR><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: top" align=left>Posted by: Hatebank at Fri Sep 26 16:21:04 SGT 2008
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
 
Last edited:

mockingbird

Alfrescian
Loyal
If there was no sub-prime crises and investment banks' share prices continue to shoot up, how much would DBS stand to gain financially on its DBS High Notes 5, Lehman Mini Bonds etc?

Anyone knows?
 

Manchu

Alfrescian
Loyal
Wasn't this the same Tan Kin Lian that not so long ago wanted to make a show-down at the NTUC Insurance AGM over some new changes to policy holders (he collected signatures of NTUC policy holders who were against such changes) . But he eventually backed down after he met Lim Boon Heng from the Government.

Now he wants to try something new again by petitioning the Singapore Government. I think he is still very much a PAP man (his track record shows), but just attempting to raise his own public profile eversince he left NTUC Insurance.
 
Z

Zombie

Guest
You deposit money in a bank. It goes down, so is your money.
You invest in Lehman minibond, essentially you are depositing money in Lehman.
Lehman goes down, so is your money. It has nothing to do with the risk level of minibond.

Why Tan Kin Lian keep talking about the risk of those Lehman minibond?
 

makapaaa

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
If there was no sub-prime crises and investment banks' share prices continue to shoot up, how much would DBS stand to gain financially on its DBS High Notes 5, Lehman Mini Bonds etc?

Anyone knows?

TV2008080918350200-1.jpg


Profit I pocket, loss u eat! *hee*hee*
 

davetan3

Alfrescian
Loyal
"High Notes 5 is not a 'low risk' product; it was clearly highlighted that in the worst case scenario, the investor could lose the entire investment amount" = Qoute.

even AAA rated bonds would lose all their value in the worst case scenario ! To push this thought process further, in the worst case scenario, the whole earth could be destroyed by a gigantic earthquake.

the statement doesn't mean anything.

What the prospectus needs to highlight is the likelyhood of default, as compared to say US gov treasury bonds.
 

tonychat

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
Why Tan kin lian like that?

he was a PAP man before and serve Lee Kuan Yew well.

howcome now turn against Govt?

PAP govt never gun point at investors, banks' programmes are mainly for the interest of the bank ,where got do loogee business. PAP treats him so well, he should fight for PAP and not for the fools.

Am i reading this right?? Serve LKY well??? Come on, you regard him as king???. I thought in a republic, it is the govt that serve the country and people and not to a person.

Oh yes, i forgotten.. a sinkie thinks like that, For once, i thought that i am in a Thai forum.
 

halsey02

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Wasn't this the same Tan Kin Lian that not so long ago wanted to make a show-down at the NTUC Insurance AGM over some new changes to policy holders (he collected signatures of NTUC policy holders who were against such changes) . But he eventually backed down after he met Lim Boon Heng from the Government.

Now he wants to try something new again by petitioning the Singapore Government. I think he is still very much a PAP man (his track record shows), but just attempting to raise his own public profile eversince he left NTUC Insurance.

Wanna bet!, that, soon, he will be up as a candidate for PRESIDENT. This is one of thier 'pull wool' over people's eyes, to create an image that, he is championing the cause of the common people. After, crossing over, the 'sheep skin' slides off, we will see again, the 'wolf' in its glory!.

Who wanna bet!?
 
Z

Zombie

Guest
"High Notes 5 is not a 'low risk' product; it was clearly highlighted that in the worst case scenario, the investor could lose the entire investment amount" = Qoute.

even AAA rated bonds would lose all their value in the worst case scenario ! To push this thought process further, in the worst case scenario, the whole earth could be destroyed by a gigantic earthquake.

the statement doesn't mean anything.

What the prospectus needs to highlight is the likelyhood of default, as compared to say US gov treasury bonds.


"AAA rating" is already about "likelihood of default". No? :confused:

You cannot compare say, Company-issued bonds to Gov-issued bonds. The risk structures are different and comparison can be very misleading.
 

jw5

Moderator
Moderator
Loyal
"High Notes 5 is not a 'low risk' product; it was clearly highlighted that in the worst case scenario, the investor could lose the entire investment amount" = Qoute.

even AAA rated bonds would lose all their value in the worst case scenario ! To push this thought process further, in the worst case scenario, the whole earth could be destroyed by a gigantic earthquake.

the statement doesn't mean anything.

What the prospectus needs to highlight is the likelyhood of default, as compared to say US gov treasury bonds.
Nobody could have predicted the fall of Lehman at the time of issue as the global financial crisis that followed afterward was unprecedented. Even if the people selling the product claimed that any default was "unlikely", they would probably not be liable for any wrongful selling to the retail customer.
The issue here is whether there were any mis-representations or untrue assertions which induced the retail investor to buy the product.
 

jw5

Moderator
Moderator
Loyal
Wanna bet!, that, soon, he will be up as a candidate for PRESIDENT. This is one of thier 'pull wool' over people's eyes, to create an image that, he is championing the cause of the common people. After, crossing over, the 'sheep skin' slides off, we will see again, the 'wolf' in its glory!.

Who wanna bet!?
Actually I would love to see this guy run for president.
 

mockingbird

Alfrescian
Loyal
Nobody could have predicted the fall of Lehman at the time of issue as the global financial crisis that followed afterward was unprecedented. Even if the people selling the product claimed that any default was "unlikely", they would probably not be liable for any wrongful selling to the retail customer.
The issue here is whether there were any mis-representations or untrue assertions which induced the retail investor to buy the product.

I bet those financial relationship managers told the ah peks & ah sohs the risk was very very small because these investment banks were very huge and safe.
 

jw5

Moderator
Moderator
Loyal
I bet those financial relationship managers told the ah peks & ah sohs the risk was very very small because these investment banks were very huge and safe.
I'm sure some of them did.
That's why I hope that some of them will be named and that they will never work in this line again.
 

pia

Alfrescian
Loyal
I'm sure some of them did.
That's why I hope that some of them will be named and that they will never work in this line again.

To give them the benefit of the doubt, they probably sincerely thought so too. Lehman is in fact one of the biggest in US. Even DBS who is only the biggest in S'pore, will tell you they are big and safe.

The unfortunate reality is, the credit crisis is bigger than all of them put together.
 
Top