atans1

Govt sees StanChart as risky?/ LKY’s 30-year investments revisited

In China, Hong Kong, Temasek on 28/04/2015 at 4:42 am

The Hong Kong Monetary Authority says that it “takes a positive attitude should HSBC consider relocating its headquarters back to Hong Kong”, where it is the largest bank.

HSBC WEIGHS MOVE FROM LONDON HSBC was established in Hong Kong 150 years ago and moved its headquarters to London in 1993. Now it is considering a return trip. Citing changes in regulation, HSBC says it will study whether to relocate its headquarters out of London, reports Chad Bray in DealBook.

A big part of the issue is Britain’s bank levy, which was instituted in 2010 to help pay for the government’s financial crisis bailouts. While all banks operating in Britain pay the tax, Mr. Bray writes that “The levy hits British-based banks particularly hard, however, as they are taxed on their global balance sheets.” HSBC’s announcement could become a political issue as Britain nears a general election on May 7.

(NYT’s Dealbook)

Hongkong Bank is a HK quitter. It moved to UK in 1993, juz before PRC regained HK in 1997. But all is forgiven.

Both HK have S’pore have similar sized economies (about US$300bn in GDP).

HK is willing to be lender-of-last-resort to HSBC a bank with US$2,6 trillion in assets, despite HSBC being almost 9 times bigger than HK’s GDP.

Yet the S’pore authorities, it’s clear from hints in the FT, are unwilling to have StanChart HQed here (only 1.1 trillion in assets), despite Temasek being the largest single shareholder (which will benefit from reduced tax: HSBC shares were up 6% in HK yesterday), and despite many of StanChart’s operations being run from here.

The PAP administration is afraid of another of Temasek’s investments blowing up? After all StanChart is not as safe as our local banks: https://atans1.wordpress.com/2015/03/25/stanchart-not-as-solid-as-local-banks/

It also has weaker capital ratios than HSBC and the big US banks. So weak that the new CEO is expected to call for yet another massive rights issue.

Remember LKY and his bank investments that are forever? OK 30 yrs leh) Even longer than Buffett’s investments, he once said

In 2007/2008, our SWFs’ bot into UBS (GIC), Citi (GIC) and Merrill Lynch (Temasek) in a big way that ST characterised then as showing S’pore was a tua kee investor.

We lost serious money in two of the 30-yr investments by 2009.

— Estimate of Temasek’s realised losses on ML and Barclays:

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2010/08/04/swee-say-said-that-gd-temasek-lost-billions/

— Estimate of GIC’s loss on UBS as at 2011:

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2011/07/26/gic-not-reported-in-st-cna-or-today/

(BTW, Temasek’s 2012 purchase of Credit Suisse mandatory bonds:

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2012/07/22/third-time-lucky-temasek/)

 

 

 

Temasek bidding for China’s POSB?

In Banks, China, Temasek on 27/04/2015 at 11:33 am

Bidders Seen for Stake in Postal Savings Bank of China UBS, BNP Paribas and Temasek of Singapore are said to be among the preliminary bidders seeking to buy 10 percent of Postal Savings Bank of China ahead of an expected initial public offering next year that could raise $25 billion.

NYT Dealbook

Cybernuts curse top economists

In Economy on 27/04/2015 at 4:37 am

Many of those who disagreed with the policies and actions of the Soviet Communist Party and the Soviet government and actively protested against these actions were sent to mental health institutes on the grounds that they were mentally ill. The reasoning was that only those mentally ill could think that the ruling communist party could do anything wrong.

Well, we have our anti-PAP cybernuts who are living proof that not all critics of the PAP administration are sensible, rational people like me.

Below is a piece,  I posted in the wrong place on this blog, binned it by accident and couldn’t recover  it, but TRE republished somehow. Waz’s funny and sad is that the cybernuts that  congregate at TRE’s “comments” section like rats and bed bugs congregate at Bukit Batok and said nasty things about the economists Yeoh and Low, while commending and praising people like Roy Ngerng, Philip Ang, Ng Kok Lim and Uncle RedBean.

The only printable thing I can report is that they said that these economists talk rubbish because they couldn’t change govt policy when they were insiders.

Cybernuts indeed.

TRE discovers retired GIC

Actually it’s a TRE reader that discovered the economist.

Hopefully TRE readers start reading Yeoh Lam Keong’s pieces because he is a lot more economic literate than most of their heroes: people like Roy Ngerng, Philip Ang, Ng Kok Lim and Uncle RedBean.

Yeoh Lam Keong’s criticisms of govt policies are founded on facts and proven (or at least academically accepted) economic models , not BS or hot air. As are those of Donald Low: I’m now glad that TRE ie republishing Donald Low’s stuff.

Interesting while TRE is getting less and less the place where anti-PAP cybernuts gather, TOC (never a place of the anti-PAP cybernuts: in fact TOC made it respectable and fashionable to criticise the PAP administration online, showing that it could be done in a professional manner) is becoming the Hammer on-line. Hopefully the WP MPs will fund TOC from their MP allowances of $15,000 a month each. If no money is coming from the WP (WP not known to be supportive of allies) will leading members of TeamTOC be standing for election under the WP banner?

Even an eminent economist also can’t ‘tahan’ SG govt

Folks, I read two postings on Yeoh Lam Keong’s FB yesterday that I think are worth sharing.

 

Lam Keong is a prominent economist in Singapore and is heavily involved in public policy research. He is currently a private economic consultant and the Vice-President of the Economic Society of Singapore (ESS). He is also an Adjunct Professor at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, where he lectures on economics and social policy, as well as a Fellow of the Civil Service College.

You can google for the profound and inspiring socio-political writings of Lam Keong like these three on “Behind Singapore Inc”..

https://sg.news.yahoo.com/behind-singapore-inc—part-i—the-growing-class-of–working-poor-.html

https://sg.news.yahoo.com/behind-singapore-inc–part-ii—%E2%80%98gov%E2%80%99t-must-rethink-delivery-of-public-services%E2%80%99.html

https://sg.news.yahoo.com/behind-singapore-inc—part-iii—%E2%80%98pap-must-return-to-its-roots%E2%80%99.html

Here’s what he posted on his FB a/c yesterday.

(1) In pointing to an excellent, thought provoking essay by Sudhir Thomas Vadaketh (who co-authored the book “Hard Choices – Challenging The Singapore Consensus” with Donald Low).

“But sentiment is changing. Perhaps this moment, now, as we celebrate fifty years of independence, may herald the peak of our devotion to the old man. For the many problems brewing in Singapore society are, in fact, symptoms of the values he fostered. Yawning inequalities threaten cohesion and tilt the playing field, undermining social mobility. Elite governance has bred a seemingly entitled class out of touch with ordinary people.

The homogenous political landscape can no longer satisfy the demands of an increasingly sophisticated electorate. Persistent attempts to crimp free expression have dulled creativity. The heavy use of carrots and sticks has nurtured a population primed to extrinsic incentives but starved of intrinsic direction. And by defining progress in such narrow monetary terms, he has contributed to a vacuous sense of national identity.”

Read the rest here:-

http://poskod.my/features/remembering-lee-kuan-yew-singapores-mercurial-father/

(2) On Amos Yee versus Edz Ello…”Is there an inconsistency in the rule of law here?”

“Is there an inconsistency in the rule of law here? Amos Yee has since taken down all the offending materials or made them private and out of public site. However, other netizens have re-uploaded the content online in other places where he is unable to remove it. In a statement, the police explained that they take a stern view of any acts which could threaten religious harmony in Singapore…..

“Any person who uploads offensive content online with deliberate intention of wounding the religious or racial feelings of any person will be firmly dealt with in accordance with the law,” they said.

l

Regards;

Frank
Submitted by TRE reader.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 237 other followers