Petition to Mr. Tan Kin Lian

[Goh Meng Seng]

Dear Scroobal,

I did not say structured product is "low risk". I say it was "presented as low risk" by using those reference entities. The REAL risks lies in the underlying assets that investors' monies are being invested in.

Read my blog post on Minibond to understand better of the mechanism:

http://singaporealternatives.blogspot.com/2008/10/this-is-what-minibonds-is-all-about.html

DBS says its DBS High Notes is HIGH RISKS. High Notes have similar structure like Lehman Bro Minibonds.

BTW, I heard there were 5 statutory boards invested in such structured products and got burnt. Rumor has it that MAS is one of them.

Goh Meng Seng

 

[rainnix]

Thats PAP style, they will offer 2 choices, a donkey and a donkey with lipstick and both will come from the PAP stable.

The not so smart Singaporean will surmise that the donkey with lipstick is better and that he was actually given a choice.

And like the legendary Lee Clan and Goh Chok Tong and PAP MPs, they offered to donate their lawsuit winnings to charity and not accept their paypackets when the salaries were increased on 2 occasions.

Tan Kin Lian is doing the same and trusted PAP approach that sotongs here will fall for.

Although I don't have a strong command of English, I certainly not stupid. You are behaving like the SIW and deem everyone who wanted change to be "not so smart Singaporean". So are you so smart to choose prataman the greater evil?

Unless the criteria for our president be lowered, we still will have to choose the lesser of the devils.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

"Presented" by whom and in what form? Purportedly in the prospectus/on paper in writing, or oral by the banks' RM to the retail investor?

I did not say structured product is "low risk". I say it was "presented as low risk" by using those reference entities. The REAL risks lies in the underlying assets that investors' monies are being invested in.

Goh Meng Seng

 

[jw5]

Dear GMS

1. For some time now, I have held the belief that for Singapore to progress, the country needs to have opposition MPs in parliament to ensure that the government is accountable and transparent and do what is right and best for the citizens. It doesn't matter which party the opposition MPs are from and which party forms the government, as long as all parties work in the best interests of the country and the citizens, especially the weak and the poor. By the way, I'm neither a PAP nor an opposition party supporter, I'm merely a Singapore supporter.

2. If Mr Tan, you, or any other Singaporean who is able and willing sees fit to serve the country as an opposition MP, and you show that you care for the ordinary Singaporean and are willing to speak up and take action for his needs, I will definitely support you. If you don't, I won't. It's as simple as that.

3. I don't think a petition is necessary. People who step forward in the bid to serve as MPs, should realize that they are stepping forward to serve the country and the people and that they are elected based on what they can do to help the country and its citizens progress. It doesn't matter what their gender, race, status, financial standing or education level is.

 

[kakowi]

....It doesn't matter what their gender, race, status, financial standing or education level is...

And I would agree to that.

I just want to add my view that it doesn't matter what your gender, race, status, financial standing or education level is, so long as when it is time to be a voice for the people, you should be that voice.

 

[scroobal]

Dear Scroobal,

I did not say structured product is "low risk". I say it was "presented as low risk" by using those reference entities. The REAL risks lies in the underlying assets that investors' monies are being invested in.

Read my blog post on Minibond to understand better of the mechanism:

http://singaporealternatives.blogspot.com/2008/10/this-is-what-minibonds-is-all-about.html

DBS says its DBS High Notes is HIGH RISKS. High Notes have similar structure like Lehman Bro Minibonds.



BTW, I heard there were 5 statutory boards invested in such structured products and got burnt. Rumor has it that MAS is one of them.

Goh Meng Seng

Sorry, I should have made it clear. You mentioned that DBS actually stated that it was low risk on a scale of 1 to 10. Until that point I was aware that most took it as high risk that offered to consumers.

I then went to check and in my opinion I realised that it was predicated on a number of entities and those entites were actually first rate. Thats when knew no one other than the vulnerable will get their money back. In my opinion it was a once in a liftetime unexpected event. The question than lies if at the time of packaging, were the issuers aware of its toxicity.

 

[scroobal]

Although I don't have a strong command of English, I certainly not stupid. You are behaving like the SIW and deem everyone who wanted change to be "not so smart Singaporean". So are you so smart to choose prataman the greater evil?

Unless the criteria for our president be lowered, we still will have to choose the lesser of the devils.

You asked me to choose between Nathan and Tan Kin Lian. Both came from NTUC, both were paid by PAP linked entities until retirement. I do not want both. This is nothing about command of English.

Sorry if I was blunt and sounded rude. I know that you are one of the better forummers here and the old SBF and certainly nicer than me in the way of communication. I felt strongly about this.

I just can't accept why the 3rd elected president has to again come from NTUC. You know that if they nominate an open PAP ex MP or Minister, the whole world will be laughing at us. The next best thing is to nominate a PAP and thats NTUC. NTUC was created, mainatined and continues to be controlled entity in this NTUC. The NTUC Sec Gen if you are not aware must first become a PAP MP and a minister before taking on that role.

Foreigners might think that the workers(union members) picked the president.This is the reason why LHL can proudly claim a one party approach.

Look at Ngiam, after collecting pension than become critic.

If it had been anyone neutral but a well respected captain of industry that made such comments, the Prime Minister's Press Secretary will respond with a nasty reply, challenging the chap to join a political party followed by threats of using the "knuckledusters in a cul de sac".

Sorry for the rude way that I replied. My apologies.

 

[Ramseth]

I just can't accept why the 3rd elected president has to again come from NTUC. You know that if they nominate an open PAP ex MP or Minister, the whole world will be laughing at us. The next best thing is to nominate a PAP and thats NTUC. NTUC was created, mainatined and continues to be controlled entity in this NTUC. The NTUC Sec Gen if you are not aware must first become a PAP MP and a minister before taking on that role.

What if, just for example, next PE, Lim Boon Heng v. Tan Kin Lian?

NTUC ex-labour chief v. NTUC ex-insurance chief. You vote who?

 

[scroobal]

What if, just for example, next PE, Lim Boon Heng v. Tan Kin Lian?

NTUC ex-labour chief v. NTUC ex-insurance chief. You vote who?

Spoil my vote. As I said Tan Kin Lian or even Lim Boon Heng who is a religious man are both decent people. I hope you realise that the PAP and NTUC generally do not take accept criminals, rapists and murders. They will take good and well qualified people and present them as champions to you and me.

If we are silly or can't connect the dots, we will end giving the PAP a one party rule but blame everyone else for allowing PAP to get away with one party rule.

Looks like it working. Then tomorrow we will blame everyone else and who are the "stupid 66.6%".

I suppose you are going to tell me that Tan Kin Lian was folled for 30 years and one day after retirement, he opened his blindfold.

What about Catherine Lim. You think she is a nice person or against Singaporeans. Do you think she is a charlatan. Why do think you she got the treatment from PAP - knuckle dusters and all . Why do you Ngiam did not and Tan Kin Lian did not.

Can recall GMS condeming Catherine Lim many years ago and Melvin had to help him against the backlash. Its really weird isn't it.

PAP has controlled our minds that we are thinking that we are making intelligent and informed decisions while working with options offered only by PAP.

As Robox said, you kill the chicken to frighten the monkeys. Who is left? PAP, NTUC, GLC, and they all nice people.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Scroobal

Hmmm could we say that if TKL becomes an even bigger shit magnet then Andrew Kuan , then he has joined the ranks of the genuine opposition.



cheers


Locke

 

[scroobal]

Dear Scroobal

Hmmm could we say that if TKL becomes an even bigger shit magnet then Andrew Kuan , then he has joined the ranks of the genuine opposition.
cheers
Locke

Would you have voted for Andrew Kuan. I would not.

The day Tan Kin Lian openly says that PAP has stifled democracy in this country and has damaged it or to the effect is the day that I see a changed man. Merely standing up to offer alternate view is not. Remember Viv, B in his first month in politics stated that hewanted to change the PAP from within and to provide alternative perspectives.

I bet you my last dollar that he will not. GMS can psycho him till the next elections.

Let me put it this way. I met the man and I know the man. He is decent, hardworking and socially an asset. Ho Peng Kee in person is even more decent and geuninely concerned about people at a personal level.

 

[Ramseth]

Bro Scroobal, you remind me of a football folklore. You know, Argentina won the World Cup twice, in 1978 (when Mario Kempes was the hero) and in 1986 (when Diego Maradona was the hero).

Sometime in later years, Kempes was interviewed for a football documentary program. In it, he was asked, if Argentina Team '78 played Argentina Team '86, who'd win? His reply was, "Argentina."

 

[jw5]

And I would agree to that.

I just want to add my view that it doesn't matter what your gender, race, status, financial standing or education level is, so long as when it is time to be a voice for the people, you should be that voice.

Already noted in points 1 and 2.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Scroobal,

Perhaps some muddying of the waters now as I recall reading in ST viz the DBS forum with aggrevied investors that some investors apparently told ST that the DBS rep admitted on a scale of 1-10 that the risk factor of the material minibonds/notes was 8.

Tan Kin Lian's latest statements seem to give the impression that there may be a substantive legal case for misrepresenation.

REPLY
In my view, this omission is material. The investors can sue the financial institution.

It is better for the government to act and take action to enforce the law (i.e. Securities and Futures Act) which requires the seller of securities to provide relevant, reliable and complete information about the securities being sold to the public.
Posted by Tan Kin Lian

Based on the above, aggrevied investors expectations may now be quite high. I hope it is not based on 'misrepresentation' as well

Cheers

Sorry, I should have made it clear. You mentioned that DBS actually stated that it was low risk on a scale of 1 to 10. Until that point I was aware that most took it as high risk that offered to consumers.

I then went to check and in my opinion I realised that it was predicated on a number of entities and those entites were actually first rate. Thats when knew no one other than the vulnerable will get their money back. In my opinion it was a once in a liftetime unexpected event. The question than lies if at the time of packaging, were the issuers aware of its toxicity.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Scroobal,

I think quite afew Singgies know where you are coming. But what to do given the present ground realities? No one of even the slightest hint of true independence with stature, substance and gravitas appears willing to throw his/her hat into the political arena at this moment, not even when it comes to the more passive PE, so how?

Well if OTC could spring a surprise of sorts, I say let's give our support to the best of the worst, with our eyes fully open of course! Hopefully this may then encourage the true independents to finally stoke up the courage, interest and concern to take the plunge.

Btw I thought Phey Yew Kok was a criminal?

Spoil my vote. As I said Tan Kin Lian or even Lim Boon Heng who is a religious man are both decent people. I hope you realise that the PAP and NTUC generally do not take accept criminals, rapists and murders. They will take good and well qualified people and present them as champions to you and me.

If we are silly or can't connect the dots, we will end giving the PAP a one party rule but blame everyone else for allowing PAP to get away with one party rule.

Looks like it working. Then tomorrow we will blame everyone else and who are the "stupid 66.6%".

I suppose you are going to tell me that Tan Kin Lian was folled for 30 years and one day after retirement, he opened his blindfold.

What about Catherine Lim. You think she is a nice person or against Singaporeans. Do you think she is a charlatan. Why do think you she got the treatment from PAP - knuckle dusters and all . Why do you Ngiam did not and Tan Kin Lian did not.

Can recall GMS condeming Catherine Lim many years ago and Melvin had to help him against the backlash. Its really weird isn't it.

PAP has controlled our minds that we are thinking that we are making intelligent and informed decisions while working with options offered only by PAP.

As Robox said, you kill the chicken to frighten the monkeys. Who is left? PAP, NTUC, GLC, and they all nice people.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

I would have, even though I knew that Andrew Kuan was an average PAP reject opportunist with an apparent christian fundamentalist background. The proverbial "bicycle thief" proposition Bro. These are the sad unfortunate present ground realities. We have to live with what we have and make the most of it.

Look at that new PAP chap Dr Tan Wu Meng, another Vivian in the making, really makes me puke

Btw I agree on your take of Ho Peng Kee, nice bloke in private and enjoyable chap to have on your footie team.

Would you have voted for Andrew Kuan. I would not.

The day Tan Kin Lian openly says that PAP has stifled democracy in this country and has damaged it or to the effect is the day that I see a changed man. Merely standing up to offer alternate view is not. Remember Viv, B in his first month in politics stated that hewanted to change the PAP from within and to provide alternative perspectives.

I bet you my last dollar that he will not. GMS can psycho him till the next elections.

Let me put it this way. I met the man and I know the man. He is decent, hardworking and socially an asset. Ho Peng Kee in person is even more decent and geuninely concerned about people at a personal level.

 

[scroobal]

Bro Scroobal, you remind me of a football folklore. You know, Argentina won the World Cup twice, in 1978 (when Mario Kempes was the hero) and in 1986 (when Diego Maradona was the hero).

Sometime in later years, Kempes was interviewed for a football documentary program. In it, he was asked, if Argentina Team '78 played Argentina Team '86, who'd win? His reply was, "Argentina."

Very well put bro. In a nutshell, you have said it all.

 

[scroobal]

Scroobal,

Perhaps some muddying of the waters now as I recall reading in ST viz the DBS forum with aggrevied investors that some investors apparently told ST that the DBS rep admitted on a scale of 1-10 that the risk factor of the material minibonds/notes was 8.

Tan Kin Lian's latest statements seem to give the impression that there may be a substantive legal case for misrepresenation.

[

My personal opinion (which amounts to my sense of worth) is the legal approach has no hope.

DBS, Ho Ching, LHL and MAS equation are too close for comfort.

Glenn Knight is not extactly the right person to act on such cases. I was surprised that he got roped in by TKL.

 

[scroobal]

I would have, even though I knew that Andrew Kuan was an average PAP reject opportunist with an apparent christian fundamentalist background. The proverbial "bicycle thief" proposition Bro. These are the sad unfortunate present ground realities. We have to live with what we have and make the most of it.

Bicycle thief still in operation but Andrew was a long serving PAP grassroots leader. Thats why I cannot stomach.

Look at that new PAP chap Dr Tan Wu Meng, another Vivian in the making, really makes me puke

Agree with you. He wrote to Viv B directly ( tells you a lot) Did not want to bother with the minor riff raffs.

Btw I agree on your take of Ho Peng Kee, nice bloke in private and enjoyable chap to have on your footie team.

Don't ever tell him you got a scratch football game going, he will be there in a jiffy. Wifey tends to be a little aloof and can get caustic.

 

[scroobal]

Scroobal,

I think quite afew Singgies know where you are coming. But what to do given the present ground realities? No one of even the slightest hint of true independence with stature, substance and gravitas appears willing to throw his/her hat into the political arena at this moment, not even when it comes to the more passive PE, so how?

Well if OTC could spring a surprise of sorts, I say let's give our support to the best of the worst, with our eyes fully open of course! Hopefully this may then encourage the true independents to finally stoke up the courage, interest and concern to take the plunge.

Btw I thought Phey Yew Kok was a criminal?

I guess its a personal thing. I will puke at the ballot box if I have to tick any PAP jokers or its associates. DNA cannot take it. The PAP chaps know where I stand and will not raise anything that is party bullshit. Discussions on genuinely sincere initiative.

Yes, Phew Yeo Kok is a criminal. The guy who fixed up Tan Wah Piow.