Comments on: GIC may lose big on investment in apartments

By: Joey

Joey — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 00:57:26 +0000

How ironic. On the one hand Mr. Teo Ser Luck on the SAA funding fiasco mentioned that since the money (funding of S$900,000 to the SAA) comes from tax payers money, the SSC has to be extra careful on how the money is spent. Now that Billions of Singapore Tax payers dollars have been lost through GIC and TH, no one is accountable, and no investigation is done.

By: New Era

New Era — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 13:55:19 +0000

GIC and Temasek appear to be in the business of losing money.
Suzhou was a huge loss and so was Batam Industrial Park.

I am sure Thaksin Shinawatra will tell you that Temasek is bad news.

By: FeverGuy

FeverGuy — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 13:00:46 +0000

Greedy Idiotic Cowards. GIC. 575 millions can feed 100000 poor families for 30 years.

By: Where are we heading

Where are we heading — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 09:11:01 +0000

When I first read about SG Govt’s libel suit against the Wall Street Journal, I was incredibly bewildered. I thought they should know better that WSJ is outside SG, not like they can be oppressed. It is the beginning of a good showdown. If a major medium chooses to back a political party, it is halfway to success, the opposite and the party is likely to be doomed. Lets see if this is the case.

By: Lydia Lim Mui Hum

Lydia Lim Mui Hum — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 07:46:31 +0000

That is why many intellectuals have been calling for Transparency.

If any loss, its not about wealth loss of a billionare. ITs the Loss of the People’s Money.

So, as you can see, i do not know IF there is any loss.
I am speaking from a technical angle.

Its either full transparency or there is no full transparency. Yes, i meant it to be an oxymoron.

But do you know what i mean, that is all.

But then as long as singaporeans continue to accept. There is no need for CHANGE. ITs now in the hands of singaporeans. they decide.

By: Fortune-teller

Fortune-teller — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 05:59:05 +0000

They must have thought the compensation would be similar to what happens in Singapore…pay some measly amount to the owners to make it state land and then sell it off through expensive HDB pigeon holes.

Just goes to show that our elites will always be thinking frogs living in a well.

By: sukasuka

sukasuka — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 05:40:40 +0000

After having the grandeur experience of losing $58 000 000 000 ($58BILLIONS), what’s $575M ?? That’s not even 1%, it’s just PEANUTS for heaven’s sake.

By: popcorn

popcorn — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 04:22:03 +0000

The Managing Director of GIC, Peter Ng, is in charge of sourcing investment opportunities for GIC and bringing them up for assesment and approval during Board meetings. He should come out of the protected closet and brief Singaporeans on how many more such investments gone wrong, or else we
would keep on guessing and coming to wrong conclusions ourselves.
The Govt may insists GIC Reserves belong to the State, but Reserves are accumulated from the hard work of Singaporeans, so in effect belong to the people. We have the right to know.
It is not good we receive information only from foreigners outside the country.
This state of affairs breed suspicions and loss of trust in the capabilities of those manning our reserves.

By: NotWorth

NotWorth — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 03:57:51 +0000

Losing 500+m by GIC is probably not worthy of mention these days!

By: Arthur Lee

Arthur Lee — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 03:34:39 +0000

Its paid back time for GIC for getting involved in such kind of deal – kicking the low and middle income tenants out of their existing home… this is suck blood money.

By: ronin

ronin — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 02:51:53 +0000

It has been 2 days and the State Times still dare not report this potential big loss of GIC. Maybe ST is thinking of how best to word the article to not make GIC look so bad??

By: OnlineShmonline

OnlineShmonline — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 00:57:34 +0000

I remember reading about that Blackrock purchase of those subsidised housing units in prime NYC locations (and how the existing tenants faced the fear of being kicked out or having their previously low rentals hiked up to the moon).

I suppose GIC jumped in based on Blackrock’s potential property gains. As with alot of GIC (and Temasek)’s ventures outside of Singapore, they went in with the crowd instead of doing sufficient due diligence.

I’m still amused by companies paying high salaries to employees who buy high and redeem low. I guess they’re getting good salaries because nobody else would hire such talents.

By: Ah Siao

Ah Siao — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 16:57:59 +0000

Haha,

Looks like the closet is opening!

The govt had always taken WSJ seriously and always want the right to reply. See what they have to say this time!