GIC makes profit?
-
No one talking abt this? http://sg.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20090922/tap-gic-citi-c3bb44c.html
Or its all abt criticising the bad but not giving credit for the good?
Or maybe this is part of a media conspiracy and these news are false and just propaganda?
Humour me pls.
-
You should check out other forums which are more politically motivated than sgforums.
If I can recall correctly, they did not report on their other sales of Barclays and Merill Lynch/BoA shares which people only found out when it was reported in the foreign news agencies like Bloomberg and Reuters. (These were sold near the lows of the stock market by the way - making realised losses.)
Aren't they long term investors?
-
I think this report did mention that Temasek lost 4 billion from an early exit from Barclays and BOA.
What I am interested is, over here, people seem to be politically motivated just to criticise the current government linking every single good news to a media propaganda and pouncing on all bad news like the NZ falcons would on road kills. Haha sorry I know I will not get anywhere with this but just voicing how amused I am with the regular participants here.
-
Originally posted by gasband:
I think this report did mention that Temasek lost 4 billion from an early exit from Barclays and BOA.
What I am interested is, over here, people seem to be politically motivated just to criticise the current government linking every single good news to a media propaganda and pouncing on all bad news like the NZ falcons would on road kills. Haha sorry I know I will not get anywhere with this but just voicing how amused I am with the regular participants here.
What is the fuss? You should go read other forums, they are worse. Nothing wrong giving comments on Temasek.
-
no fuss no fuss. It is true that Temasek made a 4 bil loss. And they should answer for it and make amends for it. And when that news broke, alot of people pounced on it. But now that GIC announced they made money, when no credit for that? I dun care abt the government really but from a business point of view, I would give credit when its due. And as I said, i am just voicing my amusement of the people in this forum how they have gone quiet when good news like this breaks out.
-
So lost more or made profit more?
-
Originally posted by gasband:
I think this report did mention that Temasek lost 4 billion from an early exit from Barclays and BOA.
What I am interested is, over here, people seem to be politically motivated just to criticise the current government linking every single good news to a media propaganda and pouncing on all bad news like the NZ falcons would on road kills. Haha sorry I know I will not get anywhere with this but just voicing how amused I am with the regular participants here.
Everybody has their own biasness moulded by events that have touched his or her own lives.
You have yours just like I have mine.
You also need to understand the use of the internet as an outlet for people to vent their frustrations or to offer other alternative viewpoints which are not readily available in the mainstream media.
Just like the regular praising of the government and how good it is to live in singapore theme is often being replayed ad nauseum in the local media, over the internet, the reverse is true - people criticize and point out flaws.
The plethora of viewpoints and opinions are just that - it depends on what you want to believe in. No one side is wrong per say. Gotta accept that nobody has a monopoly of ideas in this internet age.
-
Originally posted by gasband:
no fuss no fuss. It is true that Temasek made a 4 bil loss. And they should answer for it and make amends for it. And when that news broke, alot of people pounced on it. But now that GIC announced they made money, when no credit for that? I dun care abt the government really but from a business point of view, I would give credit when its due. And as I said, i am just voicing my amusement of the people in this forum how they have gone quiet when good news like this breaks out.
To me I am not too fast to give credit as yet after all they lost so much in the past. There are people who are still continuing to monitor their performance. This deal may not be good enough for them to cover all the losses they made in the past. -
Well, Temasek lost 4 billion and GIC made 1.4billion.
So GIC win. So whats your question really?
-
Originally posted by charlize:
Everybody has their own biasness moulded by events that have touched his or her own lives.
You have yours just like I have mine.
You also need to understand the use of the internet as an outlet for people to vent their frustrations or to offer other alternative viewpoints which are not readily available in the mainstream media.
Just like the regular praising of the government and how good it is to live in singapore theme is often being replayed ad nauseum in the local media, over the internet, the reverse is true - people criticize and point out flaws.
The plethora of viewpoints and opinions are just that - it depends on what you want to believe in. No one side is wrong per say. Gotta accept that nobody has a monopoly of ideas in this internet age.
Opinions understood.
-
Originally posted by gasband:
no fuss no fuss. It is true that Temasek made a 4 bil loss. And they should answer for it and make amends for it. And when that news broke, alot of people pounced on it. But now that GIC announced they made money, when no credit for that? I dun care abt the government really but from a business point of view, I would give credit when its due. And as I said, i am just voicing my amusement of the people in this forum how they have gone quiet when good news like this breaks out.
Well, similarly for the sg government (and probably everybody else for that matter), they will choose to highlight their achievements and downplay any shortcomings.
GIC makes 1.6 billion selling citi shares - front page of the newspaper.
Barclays, MerillLynch/BoA - sold at the lows and realising a big loss. Not reported or reported in a small paragraph somewhere deep in the local newspaper.
We all have biasness.
-
Originally posted by Fantagf:
To me I am not too fast to give credit as yet after all they lost so much in the past. There are people who are still continuing to monitor their performance. This deal may not be good enough for them to cover all the losses they made in the past.of cos of cos. that is the assumption they lost more than they earned. I am not about to search internet for proof of how much they earned vs how much they lost. Temasek says since their inception, they have made gains on their portfolio of around 15%. I dun know how true is that, could be media propaganda again
. As I said from a business point of view, if this year I made a loss, it is of cos bad. But if the next year, I made a profit, even it is doesnt cover the loss in the previous year, why should there not be credit given? thats how it works in the corporate world. Why is it different here? Of cos, lets see how their performance is in 2010 before we give further credit. But for now, they have done well. -
Originally posted by gasband:
of cos of cos. that is the assumption they lost more than they earned. I am not about to search internet for proof of how much they earned vs how much they lost. Temasek says since their inception, they have made gains on their portfolio of around 15%. I dun know how true is that, could be media propaganda again
. As I said from a business point of view, if this year I made a loss, it is of cos bad. But if the next year, I made a profit, even it is doesnt cover the loss in the previous year, why should there not be credit given? thats how it works in the corporate world. Why is it different here? Of cos, lets see how their performance is in 2010 before we give further credit. But for now, they have done well.
just keep fingers crossed that this is just the beginning of the many profits in time to comeguess people are stricter in this as we are well aware it is the money of the people of Singapore the govt is using for investment.
-
Originally posted by charlize:
Well, similarly for the sg government (and probably everybody else for that matter), they will choose to highlight their achievements and downplay any shortcomings.
GIC makes 1.6 billion selling citi shares - front page of the newspaper.
Barclays, MerillLynch/BoA - sold at the lows and realising a big loss. Not reported or reported in a small paragraph somewhere deep in the local newspaper.
We all have biasness.
I can certainly agree with your first statement, that it is all the same with every single company in this world. Everything that appears on media is a PR exercise. But whether it appears in 2 small paragraphs or one big chunk of front page, it doesnt matter. To me, it is still, bad news is bad news. Good news is good news. But I get what you mean.
-
Originally posted by Fantagf:
just keep fingers crossed that this is just the beginning of the many profits in time to comeguess people are stricter in this as we are well aware it is the money of the people of Singapore the govt is using for investment.
Definitely. It is the same when the stress on us to be accountable to shareholders. They are similarly accountable to the citizens. Lets not make their jobs more difficult by giving them undue criticism and not giving them due recognition. I always believe in a coporate world, natural elimination always take place. When they are not good enough, they will be elimnated naturally. No need for us to attack them.
-
Originally posted by gasband:
But whether it appears in 2 small paragraphs or one big chunk of front page, it doesnt matter.
It matters.
It really matters.
-
Originally posted by gasband:
When they are not good enough, they will be elimnated naturally.
Like Ho Ching?
Or Lee Kuan Yew?
-
Originally posted by gasband:
Definitely. It is the same when the stress on us to be accountable to shareholders. They are similarly accountable to the citizens. Lets not make their jobs more difficult by giving them undue criticism and not giving them due recognition. I always believe in a coporate world, natural elimination always take place. When they are not good enough, they will be elimnated naturally. No need for us to attack them.
I don't blame anyone to give criticisms and comments about them. They are accountable. Who is going to speak for us when we the people who are feeding the ruling party are not fairly treated by the ruling party? -
Originally posted by angel3070:
It matters.
It really matters.
Fine if it matters to you. It doesnt to me. So your views are accepted.
-
Originally posted by angel3070:
Like Ho Ching?
Or Lee Kuan Yew?
We know this is not the case and never will be as long as thunderstrike party is still around. Cronyism and nepotism rule! -
Originally posted by angel3070:
Like Ho Ching?
Or Lee Kuan Yew?
Yeah sure. I dun believe that if they are not good enough, they can stay on. Its a matter of time. But if they are really good, they will stay on no matter how hard you try.
-
Originally posted by Fantagf:
I don't blame anyone to give criticisms and comments about them. They are accountable. Who is going to speak for us when we the people who are feeding the ruling party are not fairly treated by the ruling party?Alright, I apologise. I dun mean that there should be no criticisms or they are not good but constructive ones are welcomed of cos. I go into meetings discussing why performances are bad and we expect criticisms of cos but criticisms that will help us improve. Not criticisms like "hey u suck.". Doesnt help, hope you understand.
-
Originally posted by gasband:
Alright, I apologise. I dun mean that there should be no criticisms or they are not good but constructive ones are welcomed of cos. I go into meetings discussing why performances are bad and we expect criticisms of cos but criticisms that will help us improve. Not criticisms like "hey u suck.". Doesnt help, hope you understand.
From the way the ruling party works, I doubt the ruling party will take the constructive criticisms from the ground seriously and work on it. They regard themselves as alpha and omega. -
Originally posted by Fantagf:
From the way the ruling party works, I doubt the ruling party will take the constructive criticisms from the ground seriously and work on it. They regard themselves as alpha and omega.well, i will not deny that there is truth in what you say. But this is fact and how things are done. I can give you a ficticious example but you might find that this happens almost everyday in your workplace. Your CEO announces the reasons for retrenching staff. Tries to sugar coat the whole announcement with reasons or excuses, some might say. You are part of the group listening to the announcement. And have plenty of grievances about the announcement. You stand up suddenly and shout "you asshole. You liar." You know what, you might just be right that he is an asshole and a liar but by standing up in front of everyone else in a corporate announcement, it shows a lack of professionalism and because of that, i can almost be sure that your credibility goes down the drain. If I have learned anything about making a point, its that I can still call someone an asshole albeit the right way.
-
Originally posted by gasband:
well, i will not deny that there is truth in what you say. But this is fact and how things are done. I can give you a ficticious example but you might find that this happens almost everyday in your workplace. Your CEO announces the reasons for retrenching staff. Tries to sugar coat the whole announcement with reasons or excuses, some might say. You are part of the group listening to the announcement. And have plenty of grievances about the announcement. You stand up suddenly and shout "you asshole. You liar." You know what, you might just be right that he is an asshole and a liar but by standing up in front of everyone else in a corporate announcement, it shows a lack of professionalism and because of that, i can almost be sure that your credibility goes down the drain. If I have learned anything about making a point, its that I can still call someone an asshole albeit the right way.
Go on to defend them subtlely but always remember that you will not succeed in shutting people's mouths to speak the reality and facts of the ruling party.
Please quote me throughout my posts to you when did i do what you mentioned below?
==> You stand up suddenly and shout "you asshole. You liar." You know what, you might just be right that he is an asshole and a liar but by standing up in front of everyone else in a corporate announcement, it shows a lack of professionalism and because of that, i can almost be sure that your credibility goes down the drain. If I have learned anything about making a point, its that I can still call someone an asshole albeit the right way.