GIC invests $14 billion in Swiss bank UBS
-
americans are in every country's banking district.Originally posted by walesa:If your theory held true, staff in the banking industries should still be, by and large, disproportionately American...
-
You could well pay way over the market rate for something and hold it "long term" - how does that render it a good investment? Or does simple logic escape the comprehension of someone desperately incoherent?Originally posted by Gazelle:If you dont intend and need to cash out your investment, there is really no need to worry about that. Companies like UBS and Barclays are very well run companies and they will be able to ride out the storm.
As Warren Buffet said, when he buy into the company, he would like to hold on to it forever and his company's result speaks for itself. -
Have you got a brain? Is the stakeholding-to-staff ratio disproportionately American or is the staff presence increasingly global?Originally posted by Daddy!!:americans are in every country's banking district.
So how does the regime's investment arm buying into UBS enable "your children could go and work in the other parts of the world with their heads high and not being discriminated against etc"?
-
I think a chimpanzee can do better if whatever the monkey does is correct as long as the phrase "long term" is attached to it...Originally posted by walesa:You could well pay way over the market rate for something and hold it "long term" - how does that render it a good investment? Or does simple logic escape the comprehension of someone desperately incoherent?
... what we have here is a bunch of chimpanzees supporting the big gorilla... -
-
I find it highly paradoxical that Andrew claims to be a long term investor, but does not understand what long term means.
-
1.Then,why i always see Indians interviewed by CNA?Originally posted by Daddy!!:americans are in every country's banking district.
Guys,There are many many Indians in banking industry.
Look at out new Finance Minister,ha ha.
They are really good at maths...
check who are the heads of departments of major foreign banks
then u know... -
When Temasek and GIC make such a huge investment, you can rest assure that they would have seek investment banks to do countless round of valuation on their investment before making the plunge.Originally posted by walesa:You could well pay way over the market rate for something and hold it "long term" - how does that render it a good investment? Or does simple logic escape the comprehension of someone desperately incoherent?
If you want to comment or criticise their overall investment strategy, please use quantifiable facts to support your argument, not words like "Could" -
Singapore's open economy does not allow us the luxury that North Korea has! Also, as that 'silly' Habbibie chap had said, much to his regret later, we are just 'a tiny Red Dot'. Anyway, I don't think North Korea is an example Singapore should emulate.Originally posted by walesa:What bollocks are you on about? As a matter of fact, you don't need any money to prevent speculative attacks on your currency - just take a look at how the North Korean won is safeguarded from speculation!
-
Yup!Originally posted by John Wong:Guess you got your answer
lol
-
My response was directed at the senseless drivel from that infamous drone - it's not supposed to make sense in any tangible sense imaginable. Have a sense of humour...Originally posted by TS Kan:Singapore's open economy does not allow us the luxury that North Korea has! Also, as that 'silly' Habbibie chap had said, much to his regret later, we are just 'a tiny Red Dot'. Anyway, I don't think North Korea is an example Singapore should emulate. -
Qunaitifiable facts? You can't even espouse any logic that is remotely sensible.Originally posted by Gazelle:When Temasek and GIC make such a huge investment, you can rest assure that they would have seek investment banks to do countless round of valuation on their investment before making the plunge.
If you want to comment or criticise their overall investment strategy, please use quantifiable facts to support your argument, not words like "Could"
It's probably idiots like you running those state agencies that churn out the record-losses you seem oblivious to. Oh, you might wish to know even investment banks are liable to erroneous judgements - just check what happened to Stan O'Neal if you need any reference for your limited intellect... -
You are very typical of what an armchair critics would usually do and you are no difference to football fans who speaks like they can replace Alex Ferguson after MU lose a match.Originally posted by walesa:Qunaitifiable facts? You can't even espouse any logic that is remotely sensible.
It's probably idiots like you running those state agencies that churn out the record-losses you seem oblivious to. Oh, you might wish to know even investment banks are liable to erroneous judgements - just check what happened to Stan O'Neal if you need any reference for your limited intellect... -
Originally posted by walesa:My response was directed at the senseless drivel from that infamous drone - it's not supposed to make sense in any tangible sense imaginable. Have a sense of humour...
-
Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:
Nevermind. Time for cash rich Temasick to pump in 10B to save the day.
Can you believe this crapzz..... they take Singaporeans money... raise GST, ERP and what nots and say that they have no money to take care of the aged but they can lose [b]5.57% of tens of billions of dollars in just one day...
... bloody despots....[/b] -
It sure beats being an idiot who espouses illogical theories along the lines of any investment being worthwhile so long as it's long term...Originally posted by Gazelle:You are very typical of what an armchair critics would usually do and you are no difference to football fans who speaks like they can replace Alex Ferguson after MU lose a match. -
what is the point of calling others idiot and making up story here? Another wanker in the making?Originally posted by walesa:It sure beats being an idiot who espouses illogical theories along the lines of any investment being worthwhile so long as it's long term...
An armchair critics will always be one who is only capable to making accusation without quantifiable facts and figures to support his arguement.
If you are so smart, why dont you tell us why UBS and Barclays is not a good investment for Temasek and GIC and what other investment would you suggest.,
Over to you walesa!! -
Wanker? That's what you're - and a pretty good one at that.Originally posted by Gazelle:what is the point of calling others idiot and making up story here? Another wanker in the making?
An armchair critics will always be one who is only capable to making accusation without quantifiable facts and figures to support his arguement.
If you are so smart, why dont you tell us why UBS and Barclays is not a good investment for Temasek and GIC and what other investment would you suggest.,
Over to you walesa!!
It must have been great foresight by Temasek to throw the weight behind Barclays in their anticipation of its takeover of ABN Amro, only to see the consortium led by RBS pip them to it, eh? So what sort of delusional advice could you offer the idiots of your calibre who engineered those decisions? Or was that the biggest coup of the century in your shallow books? -
... and to do that, they will need to raise GST to help the poor again...Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:
Can you believe this crapzz..... they take Singaporeans money... raise GST, ERP and what nots and say that they have no money to take care of the aged but they can lose [b]5.57% of tens of billions of dollars in just one day...
... bloody despots....[/b][/quote][quote]Originally posted by googoomuck:
Nevermind. Time for cash rich Temasick to pump in 10B to save the day. -
Armchair critics are people who are only capable for commenting after the event has unfold and by doing so, they will always feel that they are smart and their so call "prediction" is always right.Originally posted by walesa:Wanker? That's what you're - and a pretty good one at that.
It must have been great foresight by Temasek to throw the weight behind Barclays in their anticipation of its takeover of ABN Amro, only to see the consortium led by RBS pip them to it, eh? So what sort of delusional advice could you offer the idiots of your calibre who engineered those decisions? Or was that the biggest coup of the century in your shallow books?
As for the Barclays investment, would you have predicted that RBS will pip Barclays in acquiring ABN Amro during the time when Temasek was planning to make the investment?
Plus, have you done any calculation to show that Barclays investment in only worthwhile if they acquire ABN AMRO. And Barclays wont paying too much if they up their offer to out bid RBS?
So now that you have quoted BARCLAYS investment, what about UBS? What about China Construction Bank? What about Bank of China investment?
Over to you sir!! -
Self-proclaimed wankers are adept at doing precisely what you do.Originally posted by Gazelle:Armchair critics are people who are only capable for commenting after the event has unfold and by doing so, they will always feel that they are smart and their so call "prediction" is always right.
As for the Barclays investment, would you have predicted that RBS will pip Barclays in acquiring ABN Amro during the time when Temasek was planning to make the investment?
Plus, have you done any calculation to show that Barclays investment in only worthwhile if they acquire ABN AMRO. And Barclays wont paying too much if they up their offer to out bid RBS?
So now that you have quoted BARCLAYS investment, what about UBS? What about China Construction Bank? What about Bank of China investment?
Over to you sir!!
So on the back of your drivel, are you still suggesting investments are worthwhile regardless of the prevailing market prices at which they are made so long as they are made for the long term? You've done spectacularly well to fire the first salvo at your own feet...
For your preposterous claim to hold and your mindless analogies to stand, that's akin to saying putting an idiot like you in the company of the Alex Fergusons will make you one of 'em someday... -
walesa, since you are so critical about Temasek and GIC investment strategy, I am asking you.Originally posted by walesa:Self-proclaimed wankers are adept at doing precisely what you do.
So on the back of your drivel, are you still suggesting investments are worthwhile regardless of the prevailing market prices at which they are made so long as they are made for the long term? You've done spectacularly well to fire the first salvo at your own feet...
For your preposterous claim to hold and your mindless analogies to stand, that's akin to saying putting an idiot like you in the company of the Alex Fergusons will make you one of 'em someday...
1) Would you have predicted that RBS will pip Barclays in acquiring ABN Amro during the time when Temasek was planning to make the investment?
2) Have you done any calculation to show that Barclays investment in only worthwhile if they acquire ABN AMRO.
3) Will Barclays be in better position if they have up their offer to out bid RBS?
4) Other than Barclays, what is your opinion about their investment in UBS?
5) What about China Construction Bank?
6) What about Bank of China investment?
I am sure you must have done your calculation before criticising on Temasek and GIC's investment isnt it? So assuming you are the chairman of Singapore investment arm, who sort of companies do you think it worth acquiring now and what will you consider a fair value for both seller and buyer.
Over to you sir!! -
none of your posts make sense in any tangible sense imaginable. It is funny when you think they are humourous.Originally posted by walesa:My response was directed at the senseless drivel from that infamous drone - it's not supposed to make sense in any tangible sense imaginable. Have a sense of humour... -
Is there a mandate given under the law or the constitution to allow the Temasek or GIC or the government to use citizens' monies in this manner?
Is it not the role of the elected president to stop the government from spending away or investing people's monies in risky investments and losing by the billions as has happened in Shin Corp or Global Crossing ?
If there is a mandate or legal basis for exercise of such power is there an independent internal audit check to ensure that there will be no abuses or irregularities as has happened in cases like Sembawang Maritime on the choice of investments or making of decisions ?
If there are shortcomings resulting in past losses in billions should there be some forms of independent internal audit checks which can be made available to acceptable people-watchdog agencies for greater accountability and transparency. -
Points taken ...... now can we have some really positive and exciting ideas as to how our government should run Singapore better (not that they are not doing a-hell-of-a-good-job already!)