Tan Kin Lian and disgraced lawyer Leonard Loo

[Bigfuck]

I think now that our approach has been wrong. If someone can accompany me and help hold down GMS, I will bring along pair of pliers and pry open his mouth from around TKL's dick. It has been fastened so tight that no reason, no logic and no air can get in.

See? Never listen to resident genius and superior genes Bigfuck. You better find someone with bipolar thinking he is a meng seng (star) a good shrink. I think these days, all political activists, politicians and MPs need to go for shrink evaluation man.

 

[hawker]

I make no apology for being morally upright nor being strategically more savvy in every sense. Not about being proud nor selfish here. Goh Meng Seng

I understand why you say 'NO SHAME' already.

 

[wikiphile]

I understand why you say 'NO SHAME' already.

I'm sorry, he and what achievement exactly? Being morally upright and being strategically more savvy in every sense?

 

[hawker]

I'm sorry, he and what achievement exactly? Being morally upright and being strategically more savvy in every sense?

His achievement : ex-NSP chief and Tan Kin Lian's master PE strategist.

 

[Bigfuck]

I'm sorry, he and what achievement exactly? Being morally upright and being strategically more savvy in every sense?

Getting kicked out of every political party and failing to win a single seat if can be called strategically more savvy pales in comparison to CSJ. That guy is strategically savvy guru man. He managed to be from hated to become a magnet of some of the strongest candidates in the opposition team with effective use of the new media and staff. A strategically savvy person knows how to leverage his resources to mobilize others to do his bidding. One man early white hair jester general ranting is not savvy and the out of fashion thing you dig?

 

[Hawkeye1819]

I would like to remind you of our massive CLOB losses. There was no honglim park then and no one came out to speak out for us. Singapore is an unique country. Even if you are conned, you still need to fill up questionair for the regulator to access whether you can be categorised as a misguided victim.

jixiaolan,

I'm not too sure this is the right analogy. The CLOB fiasco was caused by a govt (m'sia) imposing capital controls and then subsequently freezing the shares instead of migrating them into the malaysian central depository where they can resume trading. It was something caused by direct govt action, at the govt's discretion. Granted, there was a financial crisis which motivated the m'sians to do that, still it was purely failure at the govt level to manage the situation properly. It was primarily an issue of lack of political will on the part of the m'sians rather than an issue of insolvency or bankruptcy. There's a huge difference.

Not sure how protesting in singapore will help the situation when the onus was always on the m'sians and the m'sian govt won't get any political black marks by screwing us royally.

 

[wikiphile]

His achievement : ex-NSP chief and Tan Kin Lian's master PE strategist.

Most impressive

 

[wikiphile]

Getting kicked out of every political party and failing to win a single seat if can be called strategically more savvy pales in comparison to CSJ. That guy is strategically savvy guru man. He managed to be from hated to become a magnet of some of the strongest candidates in the opposition team with effective use of the new media and staff. A strategically savvy person knows how to leverage his resources to mobilize others to do his bidding. One man early white hair jester general ranting is not savvy and the out of fashion thing you dig?

了不起， 没得顶！ Even Lee Kuan Yew is not capable of that, all he could do was to transform a little red dot into a rich little red dot

 

[Bigfuck]

了不起， 没得顶！ Even Lee Kuan Yew is not capable of that, all he could do was to transform a little red dot into a rich little red dot

I must say this is one of the best constructive intellectual discussions for this forum that most non-star wannabes are engaging. While we may agree to disagree, we are on the same page with regards to evaluation of one person or matter, whichever word we choose to agree to disagree on. Even resident armchair critic from within the ranks would agree.

 

[Hawkeye1819]

Goh Meng Seng,

Your apology is accepted with grace. But you have to let go of this mentality that everyone who opposes your views is from the WP camp. It is also impolite to hijack a discussion in this manner.

I am not trying to belittle Tan Kin Lian or you here and I acknowledge both of you worked very hard. I am merely stating facts that many minibond investors obtained good results by working directly with banks, who were eager to protect their reputations when they realized they had to play catch up with Hong Kong. As another forummer Scroobal has mentioned, other jurisdictions manage the affair in similar fashion.

I would also note that the 3 lawyers who worked with Tan Kin Lian on the matter failed to do anything for their clients. I believe cass888 pointed out that one of them was held back because his firm demanded upfront payment.

I have close ties with UOB KayHian and can tell you straight that nobody there was pressured by Tan Kin Lian's rallies to compensate investors.

If you are not those ardent WP supporters who will defend WP and whack other parties, then my apologies to you.

I have been seeing lots of such people around for the past years and getting tired of them. I am all for social and political activism, even if some of these people have even scolded me vulgarity in public or private. I don't discount or brush aside their contributions, however little it may be.

But the arrogance of WP people really puts me off and I only put up the shortcomings of WP to show that there are things WP chose not to do (for whatever reasons they might have) while others pick it up. But to turn around and put down other people's contributions and hardwork, that is really totally uncalled for.

Frankly speaking, even for me, when I first know about Minibond, at first impression and sight when some bank tellers were trying to sell it to me, as finance and economics trained person, I also thought it was just a big piece of bonds (bonds are usually in the tens or hundreds of thousands ) being split into smaller sizes and sold as such. I didn't know much about the risk swap and such things. It was a very clever trick in using the misleading word "Minibond" to project a safe financial instrument. But I didn't fall for it because the so call 6% return looks very suspicious to me. Instinctively, my philosophy is no risk no gain.

Anyway, the point is, even if I am not too familiar with such things or issues, I could well do my own research and read up many other writings. Internet is such a wonder thing that you could practically get yourself educated in almost anything you want. If you have the heart to help out, the strong mind to uphold the most basic fundamental core principles and values, there are ways for you to do so by working hard on the research.

TKL and his team, walked into the Minibond activism with basically inadequate but basic knowledge and information. It is only later when we do a closer study on this monster Minibond and structured financial instruments that we found so much injustice in the whole thing....basically, investors have been totally fooled. It took us many man hours to figure out what the hell this monster is about. I have my more comprehensive understanding by reading the newspapers in HK which did a detailed and comprehensive dissection of Minibond.

Thus, I emphatize with investors like your niece and nephews for being fooled into this scam and we fought on. However, as I have said, if it is not through the team effort of putting up massive information and showing the truth and facts of the nature of this scam, there won't be any pressures on the govt and banks/financial institutions to own up and compensate.

The govt, particularly MAS, didn't make good of its accountability of letting such a scam to get into the financial system and harm unsuspecting investors. They kept quiet and distance themselves from any blame. Even in HK, which the Legco's report has just recently released, pointed out that the HK govt has to take up part of the responsibility for allowing this scam to past through their gatekeeping. Particularly, the previous head of financial regulation has been censured. This is only possible when the opposition in the Legco pressed for thorough investigations.

HK is a better free democracy than Singapore even though it doesn't have universal suffrage. But such freedom is not taken for granted. It took many people of many efforts and contributions to uphold its core values. But in Singapore, we have people who, for their own selfish interests, try to belittle other people's efforts and hardwork. This is a very sad thing to me. Basically, they don't understand that it takes all kinds of people to keep the Democratic movement to move on. WP alone, isn't going to be effective.


Goh Meng Seng

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

It is quite debatable here. As I have said, the rallies acted as part of the public education process as well as raising public awareness.

As I have said, without the rallies and action group providing various information and slowly establishing the fact that Minibond is actually a scam, do you think financial institutions like yours (I also know of other financial institutions which gave substantial compensation as well, but not the main banks) would want or need to "protect" their reputations?

The HK development took some time to materialize. Information on the HK development was kept open to victims in Singapore, not through the MSM here in Singapore but other various networks. The most important part of this whole saga is the literature put up to establish the fact of the case and expose the scam. This forms the legitimacy of the demand of compensations from the financial institutions. If this is not established, I guess Singaporeans will just have to resign their fate to that "you walk in with eyes open" kind of mindset.

Of course, nobody in the financial institutions want to admit that the movement has put tremendous pressures on them to make compensations. But as far as I know, certain members of the movement has been pressurized by various sectors (establishment as well as financial institutions) not to continue serving the fight for justice. If there is no pressure on these sectors, they won't be playing such game.

Goh Meng Seng

Goh Meng Seng,

Your apology is accepted with grace. But you have to let go of this mentality that everyone who opposes your views is from the WP camp. It is also impolite to hijack a discussion in this manner.

I am not trying to belittle Tan Kin Lian or you here and I acknowledge both of you worked very hard. I am merely stating facts that many minibond investors obtained good results by working directly with banks, who were eager to protect their reputations when they realized they had to play catch up with Hong Kong. As another forummer Scroobal has mentioned, other jurisdictions manage the affair in similar fashion.

I would also note that the 3 lawyers who worked with Tan Kin Lian on the matter failed to do anything for their clients. I believe cass888 pointed out that one of them was held back because his firm demanded upfront payment.

I have close ties with UOB KayHian and can tell you straight that nobody there was pressured by Tan Kin Lian's rallies to compensate investors.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Without the bad publicity created on the financial institutions, do you think they would bother to try and safeguard their "reputation" by making compensation? Mind you, it is quite a lot of money... and financial institutions are well known for their greed!

Goh Meng Seng

 

[Hawkeye1819]

aurvandil,

Can't really blame financial advisers for doing that as they're only making a livelihood. I think the main fault should lie with financial institutions who allowed such a toxic product to be sold to retail clients. FARs are just the middle men who are really employed sales people trying to make a living on commissions.

I was using the term "pass" loosely. MAS has guidelines on the type of products that are supposed to be sold to people of different profiles. Instead of doing the fact finding objectively when doing up the profile, many RMs ask questions in a leading manner. Some even go as far as to provide the "correct answer" for the person to reply so that the investor can "pass". Even worse is that if we read the MAS report correctly, some RMs proceeded to sell inappropriate products when the person had "failed" based on the risk profile.

Given the way things are, no surprise if what happened with the mini bonds happens again.

 

[Hawkeye1819]

Without the bad publicity created on the financial institutions, do you think they would bother to try and safeguard their "reputation" by making compensation? Mind you, it is quite a lot of money... and financial institutions are well known for their greed!

Goh Meng Seng

As you've mentioned in the first sentence of your previous post, "its really quite debatable". And that I agree.

At the end of the day, you could say the FIs lost money and Temasek the largest shareholder lost its shareholder value. But were director salaries cut and CEO compensation cut, people fired, etc? I don't recall so. Nobody who was really responsible for the mess actually suffered. Biggest irony is that only some FARs were fired/had commissions clawed back, etc. Slap on wrist.

And the whole talk about re-regulation by MAS is just to soothe the public. All a stage show. Nobody at the top (whether on corporate side or govt side) really paid a price of the fiasco.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Yes, I agree with you. This is because there isn't continue effort in parliament to push for regulatory change.

Goh Meng Seng

As you've mentioned in the first sentence of your previous post, "its really quite debatable". And that I agree.

At the end of the day, you could say the FIs lost money and Temasek the largest shareholder lost its shareholder value. But were director salaries cut and CEO compensation cut, people fired, etc? I don't recall so. Nobody who was really responsible for the mess actually suffered. Biggest irony is that only some FARs were fired/had commissions clawed back, etc. Slap on wrist.

And the whole talk about re-regulation by MAS is just to soothe the public. All a stage show. Nobody at the top (whether on corporate side or govt side) really paid a price of the fiasco.

 

[jixiaolan]

I had seen people came forward affectionately to hug and kiss TKL to express gratitude for his help on minibond. GMS got no such luck cos he was just acting as a translator for TKL. As for PE, when the campaigning started GMS was still in Hongkong. Unless TKL is a string puppet, there is no way for GMS to pull string in a remote location.

His achievement : ex-NSP chief and Tan Kin Lian's master PE strategist.

 

[aurvandil]

On the contrary, I place 80% to 90% of the blame squarely on the financial advisers. They are supposed to dispense honest advice for the benefit of their customers. They are not supposed to max out their commission earnings at the expense of their customers.

Given your background, I am sure you know of people who were living the good life (5 figure salary, condo, 2 seater convertible) from selling retail structured products. After Lehman, they quietly resigned and moved to another FI. 5 years on, they are back to living the good life from the commissions of new unsuspecting customers.

Can't really blame financial advisers for doing that as they're only making a livelihood. I think the main fault should lie with financial institutions who allowed such a toxic product to be sold to retail clients. FARs are just the middle men who are really employed sales people trying to make a living on commissions.

 

[hawker]

I had seen people came forward affectionately to hug and kiss TKL to express gratitude for his help on minibond. GMS got no such luck cos he was just acting as a translator for TKL. As for PE, when the campaigning started GMS was still in Hongkong. Unless TKL is a string puppet, there is no way for GMS to pull string in a remote location.

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/blogs/sing...uggestions-within-constitution-070349818.html

Having studied the powers of the President, presidential hopeful Tan Kin Lian believes the initiatives he would like to introduce if elected are within the Constitution.

Responding to comments by current President, SR Nathan, Tan said, "I have also studied the powers of the President within the constitution in framing my ideas. So far, nobody has told me that my suggestions are out of the scope of the President's powers."

The 63-year-old former NTUC Income chief announced his decision to run for President on Tuesday.

Mr Nathan, whose comments were carried in the media on Wednesday, reminded those who want to see a more aggressive President that the role is circumscribed by the Constitution.

Mr Nathan was quoted as saying: "Mr Tan or whoever can have all the ideas about what to do, but you must remember that the presidency operates by the Constitution.

"What is possible and what is not possible is determined by that. So, I won't want to belittle his enthusiasm. If he can do it, good luck to him."

Tan had earlier flagged the possibility of creating an annual report on Singapore's reserves to increase transparency on the matter.

On Wednesday, Tan said his ideas are "not made out of enthusiasm but my frank assessment of the issue (i.e. the unease of the people) and the need to better communicate the position in an annual report."

He acknowledged that there "will be limitations" on what is disclosed in the report but it "should be possible to allay the concerns of the people" without negatively impacting national interest.

Tan has also raised another initiative he would like to introduce.

Tapping on the Internet and social networking tools like blogs and Facebook, he would like to build a platform for Singaporeans and the President's office to discuss "big issues affecting the country and the people".

"I believe that it will be a good channel to maintain close contact with the people," said Tan, who will enlist others to help him manage the platform.

He also agreed with a forum writer's suggestion that losers in the Presidential poll, who garner, say 20 per cent of the vote, should be allowed to serve on the Council of Presidential Advisors.

Tan said his main aim in standing for the election is "to give Singaporeans a wider choice to candidates to vote as the next President of Singapore".

He told Yahoo! Singapore he is now forming his core campaigning team. National Solidarity Party chief Goh Meng Seng has confirmed his intention to help Tan in the campaign.

Said Goh, "Kin Lian will be a good candidate as I observe, he has a strong sense of fairness and public service."
Tan urged for the contest to be "carried out on a positive climate and that people will focus on the strong points of the candidates".

Tan also said he has "high respect" for Dr Tan Cheng Bock, ex-Minister George Yeo, former Deputy Prime Minister Tony Tan and Mr Nathan.

Dr Tan Cheng Bock has indicated he would run for President, while the other three have not confirmed if they will be contesting.


By Alicia Wong | SingaporeScene – Wed, Jun 8, 2011

 

[Hawkeye1819]

On the contrary, I place 80% to 90% of the blame squarely on the financial advisers. They are supposed to dispense honest advice for the benefit of their customers. They are not supposed to max out their commission earnings at the expense of their customers.

Given your background, I am sure you know of people who were living the good life (5 figure salary, condo, 2 seater convertible) from selling retail structured products. After Lehman, they quietly resigned and moved to another FI. 5 years on, they are back to living the good life from the commissions of new unsuspecting customers.

I've personally known people from the most corrupt (cheating others of hundreds of thousands in fake commodities bucket shop business) to the most honest. There are far worse chaps out there than FARs. The dishonest ones invariably go downhill one day, from what I observe. What goes around comes around.

 

[aurvandil]

Such problems appeared to be largely absent during KBS time. Sad to say but at this point in time, even corruption prone Malaysia has a more vigorous policy against mis-selling and financial scams. The following is a url to Central Bank of Malaysia shutting down land banking operators. Contrast this to our MAS which has adopted a "Not My Problem" approach to land banking and other investment scams.

http://www.alantanblog.com/investme...alton-international-property-group-m-sdn-bhd/

Mis-selling of financial products by actual salemen and women cloaked as financial advisors is an issue in many countries. It is driven by big commissions. The approach is how to get past the checklist and not how to work with the checklist.