Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Spinning Temasek huge losses as a success
0 views
Skip to first unread message
forec...@gmail.com
Jun 8, 2009, 4:55:41 AM6/8/09
to
On Jun 7, 9:03 pm, "truth" <tr...@universe.com> wrote:
> truth: it is indeed incredible that the pap leegime is spinning
> temasek huge losses as a success story. this is like turning
> singapore and singaporeans upside-down. only lky and
> his gangsters who have taken singaporeans for granted would
> dare so such outrageous things.
>
> http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/
> Sunday, June 07, 2009
> Temasek : Quite Amazing isn't it??
>
> I have written so much about what is wrong with Temasek until I got tired of
> writing about it - nothing seems to change for the better. From Shin Corp to
> BoA, I thought I have seen worst of the worst. But only Temasek can beat
> Temasek when it comes to surprises. We have to hear about it from
> Reuters[Link] and Wall Street Journal that Temasek has sold its stake in
> Barclays and has lost more than 800M pounds. Temasek had earlier invested
> about 1B pounds in Barclays. Temasek explained that it took its losses in
> BoA because their investment thesis had changed from Merrill's specific
> businesses to the more diversified BoA linkage to the broader US
> economy"[Link]. How then do they explain the Barclays losses? They bought a
> bank that remained a bank so there is no change in thesis. Temasek will now
> have to invent a new explanation for selling its stake in Barclays at a huge
> loss. The one thing they will never do is admit they made an error in
> judgement getting into these risky investments that turned out to be bad.
> The 1st step in improving an organisation is to accept and learn from major
> mistakes - if they had done that when they lost money in those risky
> investments in Global Crossing or Shin Corp, they might have avoided the
> massive losses that came after that.
>
> The other amazing thing that happened after $50B loss of taxpayer's money is
> our finance minister stepping forward to explain there is nothing wrong with
> these losses because Temasek had made gains of $100+B if one measures its
> gains from the 2003 trough to the 2007 peak. Tharman explained that the
> annualised gains are 15% compared with the 6% gain in the MSCI Global Index.
> Tharman had chosen 2003 instead of, say, 1999 as the starting point because
> that was the market bottom and the absolute returns would be larger than if
> he had chosen another starting point. It is not clear why he has chosen to
> compare with the MSCI Global Index when a large part of Temasek's portforlio
> is in Singapore and the STI gained 16% in the same period. It is also not
> clear how profits Temasek booked from the sale of strategy assets that are
> not listed on the market such as the 3 power stations that were sold to the
> Chinese, Malaysians and Japanese for a total of $12B (They explained that
> the purpose of the sale was to create competition - but you really have to
> wonder how that can happen when each party now owns a portion of the total
> capacity ...what incentive is there compete when they have unable generate
> for any significant gain in market share?). It is indeed surprising for me
> to see an elected representative who is supposed to serve Singapore citizens
> is trying to defend Temasek by using an arbitrary measure of performance.
> The correct way to measure Temasek's performance is to look at its return
> from active management vs the returns from passive holdings. The value add
> of the 350 people hired by Temasek is in the deals it actively cuts and the
> decisions its managers make. So far the outcome from many of these major
> deals don't seem to be good.... Much of the returns from its passive
> holdings in Singapore Blue chips requires little management and decision
> making....are achieved just by holding on to profitable GLCs.
> .
> The attempt to spin away Temasek's losses leaves much to be desired. Every
> explanation just leaves more unanswered questions. It is time for elected
> officials to take stock and make a genuine effort to ensure that the massive
> losses we have seen do not recur in the future. They either do that or we
> have to elect the people who will do the right thing in the next elections.
>
> posted by LuckySingaporean
> truth: it is indeed incredible that the pap leegime is spinning
> temasek huge losses as a success story. this is like turning
> singapore and singaporeans upside-down. only lky and
> his gangsters who have taken singaporeans for granted would
> dare so such outrageous things.
>
> http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/
> Sunday, June 07, 2009
> Temasek : Quite Amazing isn't it??
>
> I have written so much about what is wrong with Temasek until I got tired of
> writing about it - nothing seems to change for the better. From Shin Corp to
> BoA, I thought I have seen worst of the worst. But only Temasek can beat
> Temasek when it comes to surprises. We have to hear about it from
> Reuters[Link] and Wall Street Journal that Temasek has sold its stake in
> Barclays and has lost more than 800M pounds. Temasek had earlier invested
> about 1B pounds in Barclays. Temasek explained that it took its losses in
> BoA because their investment thesis had changed from Merrill's specific
> businesses to the more diversified BoA linkage to the broader US
> economy"[Link]. How then do they explain the Barclays losses? They bought a
> bank that remained a bank so there is no change in thesis. Temasek will now
> have to invent a new explanation for selling its stake in Barclays at a huge
> loss. The one thing they will never do is admit they made an error in
> judgement getting into these risky investments that turned out to be bad.
> The 1st step in improving an organisation is to accept and learn from major
> mistakes - if they had done that when they lost money in those risky
> investments in Global Crossing or Shin Corp, they might have avoided the
> massive losses that came after that.
>
> The other amazing thing that happened after $50B loss of taxpayer's money is
> our finance minister stepping forward to explain there is nothing wrong with
> these losses because Temasek had made gains of $100+B if one measures its
> gains from the 2003 trough to the 2007 peak. Tharman explained that the
> annualised gains are 15% compared with the 6% gain in the MSCI Global Index.
> Tharman had chosen 2003 instead of, say, 1999 as the starting point because
> that was the market bottom and the absolute returns would be larger than if
> he had chosen another starting point. It is not clear why he has chosen to
> compare with the MSCI Global Index when a large part of Temasek's portforlio
> is in Singapore and the STI gained 16% in the same period. It is also not
> clear how profits Temasek booked from the sale of strategy assets that are
> not listed on the market such as the 3 power stations that were sold to the
> Chinese, Malaysians and Japanese for a total of $12B (They explained that
> the purpose of the sale was to create competition - but you really have to
> wonder how that can happen when each party now owns a portion of the total
> capacity ...what incentive is there compete when they have unable generate
> for any significant gain in market share?). It is indeed surprising for me
> to see an elected representative who is supposed to serve Singapore citizens
> is trying to defend Temasek by using an arbitrary measure of performance.
> The correct way to measure Temasek's performance is to look at its return
> from active management vs the returns from passive holdings. The value add
> of the 350 people hired by Temasek is in the deals it actively cuts and the
> decisions its managers make. So far the outcome from many of these major
> deals don't seem to be good.... Much of the returns from its passive
> holdings in Singapore Blue chips requires little management and decision
> making....are achieved just by holding on to profitable GLCs.
> .
> The attempt to spin away Temasek's losses leaves much to be desired. Every
> explanation just leaves more unanswered questions. It is time for elected
> officials to take stock and make a genuine effort to ensure that the massive
> losses we have seen do not recur in the future. They either do that or we
> have to elect the people who will do the right thing in the next elections.
>
> posted by LuckySingaporean
BoA and Global Crossing, ha, what familiar 2 bearish stocks that we
forecasted.
In the stock market, > 95% of all losses from falling prices are
avoidable and if
one is aggressive and go on the short side, > 95% of losses could have
been
great gains.
Anyway, here are the latest forecasts for BoA and GLBC. The gloriest
days of
huge price swings are, unfortunately or fortunately, behind us.
http://forecasts.com/free/BAC.HTM
http://forecasts.com/free/GLBC.HTM
Making money from the stock market is not that difficult, and indeed
extremely
easy, brain-dead easy, if you have precise, reliable stock price
forecasts.
Take a look at our main site http://ForecastS.Com
Follow us on Twitter, and get very stock-smart in just minutes
http://Twitter.com/ForecastAll
Good luck ---- although with good forecasts, you don't need any.
truth
Jun 8, 2009, 5:29:42 AM6/8/09
to
Hey pls refrain from advertising your services.
<forec...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:34bea082-f14d-46f0...@n19g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
0 new messages