- Joined
- Jan 22, 2014
- Messages
- 8,901
- Points
- 113
Just curious why netcitizen put investment losses squarely on her ?
Temasek is Not a one man outfit...:(
-
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.
Chitchat The Whore has plundered hundreds of millions from Tiuniasek
- Thread starter soikee
- Start date
Just curious why netcitizen put investment losses squarely on her ?
Temasek is Not a one man outfit...:(
when a company or an organization that performs poorly
the CEO will be the 1st to go
I know what you mean Scroobal. But what I am referring to is even more nefarious. I am suggesting that there is way much less net worth in the Singapore national assets than what is stated in the CPF accounts given all the losses made with the CPF money by HC and the whole shebang she runs.
I am suggesting that people migrate quickly get foreign citizenship and renounce their Singapore citizenships then withdraw all their CPF while they can still pay and when the SGD$ is still worth something. Otherwise be prepared to have nothing eventually.
I also have absolutely no interest in hitting an incompetent, corrupt and casuistic government which has the support of 69.9% of the voting public. It is clear that the voting public is incredibly stupid and have only themselves to blame.
Forget the big idealistic aims and goals which the 69.9% clearly disagree with.
You cannot change the direction of the wind but you can change the direction of your sail.
Clearly you can see how they pick and choose, GIC picked 20 yr real rate of return while Temasek picked last year's performance. The general public are none the wiser.
ps. Terry from TOC needs to put important and latest articles at the very top. Instead we have an opinion piece from 5th July on the top and this article that is highly topical buried amongst among the snippets.
https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2017/07/12/temaseks-10-year-rolling-returns-at-10-year-low/
Temasek’s 10-year rolling returns at 10-year low?
Posted on 2017-07-12 by Leong Sze Hian
I refer to the article “Temasek’s net portfolio value hits record $275b” (Straits Times, Jul 12).
It states that “This measure includes dividends paid to its shareholder, the Finance Ministry, but not capital injections from the ministry. Temasek’s shareholder did not make any capital injections in the last financial year.”
According to the chart in its report – the 10-year rolling returns for the last 10 years is at a 10-year low of four per cent.
What was the return with “boost” assets?
According to Temasek - “From 2002 onwards, the performance of this portfolio of earlier Temasek assets is free from the “boost” afforded by such listings and continued to perform well relative to the markets, showing annualised returns of 11% in SGD terms from 31 March 2002 to 31 Mar 2012″ – why isn’t the annualised return (after adjusting for this “boost”) given, so that one can have a better understanding of what the 15 % annualised return would be reduced to without the “boost”?
The Government, which is Temasek Holdings’ sole shareholder, had said in 2014 that the capital injection then did not include proceeds from the Special Singapore Government Securities (SSGS), which are instruments that the Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board uses to invest Singaporeans’ CPF savings.
According to the Government in 2014 – Temasek Holdings does not manage any CPF monies.
It is understood that it was the first time that we had disclosure as to where exactly the capital injection into Temasek Holdings came from.
But if this was the case – why?
Transparency sometimes only?
In the 10 years to 2014, the Government had injected capital into Temasek Holdings a few times. For example, in Temasek Holdings’ 2007-2008 financial year, the MOF pumped $10 billion into the company and in 2011, the Government put in a further undisclosed amount to fund the joint venture between Temasek and Malaysian state investment firm Khazanah Nasional.
Why is it that we have partial transparency? At times, we have announcements that state the sum of the capital injections made by the government, while at other times this figure was not stated.
Also, did any of the capital injections from the past say exactly where the money came from? The clarification in 2014 by the Government stated that the $5 billion injection did not come from proceeds of the SSGS, proceeds from government land sales in Singapore, government budget surpluses, and proceeds from SGS? Did we get this clarification only because there was then renewed public interest in CPF funds?
In addition, how do we know for sure that Temasek Holdings’ capital injections before the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC) was formed, never came from CPF funds since Temasek Holdings started about 7 years before the GIC was formed?
CPF funds were first co-mingled with the rest of Government’s funds?
According to the Government, the Government pools the proceeds from SSGS issuance with the rest of the Government’s funds, such as proceeds from the tradable Singapore Government Securities (SGS), any government surpluses as well as the proceeds from land sales.
The Government said that the commingled funds were first deposited with the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) as Government deposits. MAS converts these funds into foreign assets through the foreign exchange market. However, a major portion of these assets are of a longer term nature, and are hence transferred over to be managed by GIC.
More than $35b injections into Temasek – You sure none from CPF funds?
Although the reports state that the SSGS proceeds are not passed to Temasek Holdings for management and it manages its own assets which do not contain any CPF monies, Temasek Holdings pools its assets with the rest of the Government’s funds. So, how do we know for sure, especially in the early years, as to whether the Government’s injections into Temasek Holdings did or did not include CPF funds? As of 2014, a total of $35 billion plus an undisclosed sum in 2011 were put into Temasek.
Why did it take 49 years (in 2014) for Singaporeans to be told exactly where their CPF funds have gone to, and was managed by whom?
ps. Terry from TOC needs to put important and latest articles at the very top. Instead we have an opinion piece from 5th July on the top and this article that is highly topical buried amongst among the snippets.
https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2017/07/12/temaseks-10-year-rolling-returns-at-10-year-low/
Temasek’s 10-year rolling returns at 10-year low?
Posted on 2017-07-12 by Leong Sze Hian
I refer to the article “Temasek’s net portfolio value hits record $275b” (Straits Times, Jul 12).
It states that “This measure includes dividends paid to its shareholder, the Finance Ministry, but not capital injections from the ministry. Temasek’s shareholder did not make any capital injections in the last financial year.”
According to the chart in its report – the 10-year rolling returns for the last 10 years is at a 10-year low of four per cent.
What was the return with “boost” assets?
According to Temasek - “From 2002 onwards, the performance of this portfolio of earlier Temasek assets is free from the “boost” afforded by such listings and continued to perform well relative to the markets, showing annualised returns of 11% in SGD terms from 31 March 2002 to 31 Mar 2012″ – why isn’t the annualised return (after adjusting for this “boost”) given, so that one can have a better understanding of what the 15 % annualised return would be reduced to without the “boost”?
The Government, which is Temasek Holdings’ sole shareholder, had said in 2014 that the capital injection then did not include proceeds from the Special Singapore Government Securities (SSGS), which are instruments that the Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board uses to invest Singaporeans’ CPF savings.
According to the Government in 2014 – Temasek Holdings does not manage any CPF monies.
It is understood that it was the first time that we had disclosure as to where exactly the capital injection into Temasek Holdings came from.
But if this was the case – why?
Transparency sometimes only?
In the 10 years to 2014, the Government had injected capital into Temasek Holdings a few times. For example, in Temasek Holdings’ 2007-2008 financial year, the MOF pumped $10 billion into the company and in 2011, the Government put in a further undisclosed amount to fund the joint venture between Temasek and Malaysian state investment firm Khazanah Nasional.
Why is it that we have partial transparency? At times, we have announcements that state the sum of the capital injections made by the government, while at other times this figure was not stated.
Also, did any of the capital injections from the past say exactly where the money came from? The clarification in 2014 by the Government stated that the $5 billion injection did not come from proceeds of the SSGS, proceeds from government land sales in Singapore, government budget surpluses, and proceeds from SGS? Did we get this clarification only because there was then renewed public interest in CPF funds?
In addition, how do we know for sure that Temasek Holdings’ capital injections before the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC) was formed, never came from CPF funds since Temasek Holdings started about 7 years before the GIC was formed?
CPF funds were first co-mingled with the rest of Government’s funds?
According to the Government, the Government pools the proceeds from SSGS issuance with the rest of the Government’s funds, such as proceeds from the tradable Singapore Government Securities (SGS), any government surpluses as well as the proceeds from land sales.
The Government said that the commingled funds were first deposited with the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) as Government deposits. MAS converts these funds into foreign assets through the foreign exchange market. However, a major portion of these assets are of a longer term nature, and are hence transferred over to be managed by GIC.
More than $35b injections into Temasek – You sure none from CPF funds?
Although the reports state that the SSGS proceeds are not passed to Temasek Holdings for management and it manages its own assets which do not contain any CPF monies, Temasek Holdings pools its assets with the rest of the Government’s funds. So, how do we know for sure, especially in the early years, as to whether the Government’s injections into Temasek Holdings did or did not include CPF funds? As of 2014, a total of $35 billion plus an undisclosed sum in 2011 were put into Temasek.
Why did it take 49 years (in 2014) for Singaporeans to be told exactly where their CPF funds have gone to, and was managed by whom?
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2008
- Messages
- 10,030
- Points
- 113
Ownself beats own chest!!
What is the point of the glowing results when the mgmt fees n costs are extremely high - higher than Warren Buffet pays himself!!
Publish full details of the mgmt fees,commissions,bonuses and all other costs!! No balls? Obviously - pun not intended
What is the point of the glowing results when the mgmt fees n costs are extremely high - higher than Warren Buffet pays himself!!
Publish full details of the mgmt fees,commissions,bonuses and all other costs!! No balls? Obviously - pun not intended
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2008
- Messages
- 10,030
- Points
- 113
Chip was brought to finish acting...... cannot find anyone better than the Whore
The search continues but that was many years ago - what happened? Cannot afford to pay or does not want to let go????????
It is vey obvious what is going on. The only thing most Singaporeans do is to try to convince themselves otherwise.
Because seriously if the truth came out it would be the end of Singapore and 69.9% or more Singaporeans.
Because seriously if the truth came out it would be the end of Singapore and 69.9% or more Singaporeans.
Do agree on the rate of return if CPF funds are withdrawn and placed elsewhere, the return are much better. It is actually important push factor to migrate. Those who have migrated over the last 30 years have typically used their premature CPF release for beautiful homes for example which have appreciated substantially.
Its one of the things that I cite when telling friends and family when they contemplate moving. Ther are also lots of good stories that I have shared in the past. One good example is a family where the hubby had A levels, wife O levels. They sold their HDB maisonette, money went back to CPF and they moved to Australia and withdrew the amount. They invested in a car rental business. From that they sent all there 3 kids to the best schools money could buy. First son graduated in law. Daughter is a visual media editor in a production house, 3rd in Uni.
In Singapore, husband had a kiosk in East Coast Chalet selling nasi lemak, mee siam and drinks. Wife was an account clerk in a chinese trading firm. If they were in Singapore, the would have been retrenched, kiosk or shop rental would be too high etc and worry every day.
And these are not uncommon stories. If you recall the stories that were shared in the emigration folder and Sam would be Chief Financial Advisor with other sharing their success stories. I recall a former hair dresser who moved to Melbourne that shared his story.
Its one of the things that I cite when telling friends and family when they contemplate moving. Ther are also lots of good stories that I have shared in the past. One good example is a family where the hubby had A levels, wife O levels. They sold their HDB maisonette, money went back to CPF and they moved to Australia and withdrew the amount. They invested in a car rental business. From that they sent all there 3 kids to the best schools money could buy. First son graduated in law. Daughter is a visual media editor in a production house, 3rd in Uni.
In Singapore, husband had a kiosk in East Coast Chalet selling nasi lemak, mee siam and drinks. Wife was an account clerk in a chinese trading firm. If they were in Singapore, the would have been retrenched, kiosk or shop rental would be too high etc and worry every day.
And these are not uncommon stories. If you recall the stories that were shared in the emigration folder and Sam would be Chief Financial Advisor with other sharing their success stories. I recall a former hair dresser who moved to Melbourne that shared his story.
Yes Scroobal you are right.
There are young Singaporeans migrating. In fact quite a number of them. Many of my relatives have moved out of Singapore already.
My mum who was not too happy when I left has told me several stories of children of her friends migrating and living abroad. So she realized she was not alone among her peers with sons who have migrated.
Those who are capable doing well and have good level of education and work in non government jobs are moving on. What you are left with are the fat cat civil servants who probably have no worth in the private sector and the clueless man on the street who believes everything he reads in the straits Times.
Those wannabe people who take loans to drive fancy BMWs and Mercedes SLKs and pay through their nose for a chic shoe box condo 99 year lease and think they are living the high life. Yeah those people will stay in Singapore.
Of course you have the elite rich who hang around and milk the cow as much as they can with the knowledge that if Singapore failed they could easily move on.
There are young Singaporeans migrating. In fact quite a number of them. Many of my relatives have moved out of Singapore already.
My mum who was not too happy when I left has told me several stories of children of her friends migrating and living abroad. So she realized she was not alone among her peers with sons who have migrated.
Those who are capable doing well and have good level of education and work in non government jobs are moving on. What you are left with are the fat cat civil servants who probably have no worth in the private sector and the clueless man on the street who believes everything he reads in the straits Times.
Those wannabe people who take loans to drive fancy BMWs and Mercedes SLKs and pay through their nose for a chic shoe box condo 99 year lease and think they are living the high life. Yeah those people will stay in Singapore.
Of course you have the elite rich who hang around and milk the cow as much as they can with the knowledge that if Singapore failed they could easily move on.
One observation I note of Singaporeans that have migrated is that they will inevitably buy a higher CC but not an ostentious car. There is little social pressure to compete with the Joneses like it is here. Here it is common for the young to buy BMW on ballon payment, return it after 7 years with no equity. Despite the public transportation, die die must buy car. Butler in Tanglin Club has a BMW and lives in a Condo, both husband and wife have no savings and the stories goes on and on.
In Canada nobody really talks about engine capacity when buying cars. But for the record the typical Corolla is 1.8L you don't have smaller cc. RAV4 here in Canada also bigger cc than Singapore.
The only people who tend to buy Lexus BMW and Mercedes are the Chinese. Stupid asses.
Since coming to Canada I have purchased vehicles 4 times and each time I paid in cash. I have never had a car loan here.
But you can drive off with a Honda Civic for $50+ a week no downpayment 1.99% interest 72 month loan or something.
Remember that in Singapore every 10 years got to top up COE also. Every time I hear someone say they have to get another car or top up COE cos 10 years coming up, I laugh until cry.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2014
- Messages
- 8,901
- Points
- 113
People in these countries keep their cars well maintained and they go for 300k over 20 years. Normally handed over to their kids once they get DL to bash around.
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2011
- Messages
- 6,740
- Points
- 113
It wud break the Familee's heart if they let go of the CEO's Position, can imagine how painful will they feel if they lose control or open the Books to the Public.
A boy name SUE!
Johnny [video=youtube;NIMgEEASoWQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIMgEEASoWQ[/video] $$$
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2008
- Messages
- 22,619
- Points
- 113
no worries ... dey can rely on their cpf any time ...
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2008
- Messages
- 22,619
- Points
- 113
dey oni haf 1 staff woking on it ... u shud b happy dat u finally got it ... being patient does pay ...
got 1 fella ask 1 4 sumting n was told it wud take 56 man years ... he flipped ...
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2013
- Messages
- 17,813
- Points
- 113
In the investing world it's usually one man/brains behind the entire operation.maybe that man has a partner or a few talented ones.the rest are just administrative staff.
Also in the investing world, usually the main guy would want to have most of the control,don't want too many cocks questioning ur judgement.investing is a solo activity like poker,not a democracy.
However in temasek's case....
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2008
- Messages
- 22,619
- Points
- 113
den put losses on who? ... ze chairman? ... wud dat b betta? ...
Similar threads
