- Joined
- Jun 21, 2010
- Messages
- 34,840
- Points
- 113
Buy high sell low, kickbacks in my pocket.
You believe got person so suay? Blindfold throw dart suka suka pick also won't be so 'heng' kena claypot all losers.
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Another multi-million $ loss by Ho Ching
- Thread starter LITTLEREDDOT
- Start date
Buy high sell low, kickbacks in my pocket.
You believe got person so suay? Blindfold throw dart suka suka pick also won't be so 'heng' kena claypot all losers.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2009
- Messages
- 11,702
- Points
- 83
hi there
1. no offence!
2. you must be more than just some dafter sheep.
3. oops! would you bend forward when your master instruct you to?
4.
you do!proven bad investor, the entire Leegime.
Problem is they like to listen to the popular trend of the day. Pre-2008, they bought the story sold by the global finance institution, lock, stock and barrel.
Post-2008, they went for the China and India story, and proceeded to flush out their useless Ang Moh advisors with Ah Nehs and Ah Tiongs, and now we are seeing another round of shafting to Temasick and GIC for their overweight plays in commodities, India and China.
Another round of state assets transfers at super familee rate is in the works. But I wonder what's left to transfer from MOF? Perhaps Singapore pools and turf club? Maybe even ERP can also be "privatise".
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2008
- Messages
- 24,581
- Points
- 0
i just infract that sinkie for being stupid.. maybe he should learn how to use his brain first.
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,634
- Points
- 48
If you put that earlier post about them getting fined for tax dodging in Korea and put two and two together, I do not believe it is not beneath the GIC/Temasek to cross bill each other via shell companies in which the ultimate bearer of the losses are the shareholders (read - Singaporean CPF).
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,634
- Points
- 48
Wow...got infract power and rep power somemore, that's all your life is made of you sad little stinkie reject ladyboy fuckbuddy.
Exciting times!
Exciting times!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2008
- Messages
- 26,716
- Points
- 113
That's what you get for doing business with Ah Nehs.. they are natural born creative accountants.
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2008
- Messages
- 4,315
- Points
- 0
commodities were the king when China growing like no body business. now China slow down due to Europe bankruptcy and US slow down. if u enter in the 90's for commodities, u will gain a lot by now. if u only enter after the millennium, make a bit still ok. anything after that, u will be the last one standing for the musical chair.
thank you for the beautiful post. changi airport?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2008
- Messages
- 5,058
- Points
- 0
When I lose, my fund mgrs win........ when I win, my fund mgrs also win. These bastards play with my money and from the money they made from investors they drive big limo.......... whether COE is sky high or not
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2008
- Messages
- 5,058
- Points
- 0
So was Chip Goodyear right to use S$ to punt commodities????
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2008
- Messages
- 4,315
- Points
- 0
he never see this coming.
investment the best u study and make decision yourself. loss money also never mind, consider pay school fees and a lesson learnt.
don't try to speculate when u got no time to study and hope to win big. its gambling. where got part time effort and big money?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2011
- Messages
- 27,901
- Points
- 113
It is small change for Sinkapore Inc since it is less than a billion. Question is why would Temasek want to hold penny stock? There is somebody in this company that Temasek want to support?
CPF is being screwed by GIC. Temasick plunders national assets via sweetheart transfers from MOF.
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2011
- Messages
- 4,448
- Points
- 113
Oh, I thought Temasek borrowed money from MOE which in turn borrowed money from CPF Board.
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2009
- Messages
- 9,841
- Points
- 0
Agree. It is akin to saying Dr Yuan made his fortune being a pharmcist.
:o
:o
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2010
- Messages
- 34,840
- Points
- 113
Even when brunei prince jefri blew billions the sultan also dealt with his own brother and sacked him....even though the monies in a way is theirs to begin with.
Here we have the queen dumping OUR billions into the longkang without anyone batting an eyelid.
Here we have the queen dumping OUR billions into the longkang without anyone batting an eyelid.
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2009
- Messages
- 9,841
- Points
- 0
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2008
- Messages
- 2,109
- Points
- 83
To Olam CEO Sunny Verghese and the Board of Directors:
In the two and one-half years Muddy Waters, LLC has been openly criticizing publicly-traded companies, we have not seen a response as defensive as yours - not even from Sino-Forest. On Monday, our Director of Research gave a brief talk on Olam at a well-respected charity event. He presented facts about Olam along with Muddy Waters's opinion that Olam is at risk of collapsing due multiple factors, including its debt load. As Olam has since said, his comments were not overly substantive. But based on this alone, Olam halted its stock, scheduled two conference calls, discussed buying back shares, and issued statements that included saying it is not a "fly-by-night company". It has further evidenced a bizarre fixation on baseball caps.
Olam's disproportionate reaction is extraordinary in our experience. Should Olam come to collapse (as we believe it will), its use of much-needed cash to buy back shares at this time should give rise to questions about whether fiduciary responsibilities have been breached -- particularly given the possible existence of individual motivations that are not necessarily aligned with those of Olam's lenders. We also note Olam's attempts to impugn our credibility.
You and your investors should note that attempting to silence critics is not a plan of corrective action. In no way does it make Olam stronger. The February 2011 CLSA report, which raised far fewer concerns than we have identified internally, and that Olam itself made so controversial, should have caused you to work toward repairing what ails your business and your balance sheet. Instead, Olam has since increased its a) debt load by approximately S$900 million, b) cumulative investment cash burn by approximately S$2 billion, and c) cumulative operating cash burn by approximately S$500 million. In other words, you did the exact opposite of what you should have done. Your actions have been an abject failure of leadership.
Companies that attack criticism the way Olam does fail to understand that raising money from the public is a privilege. Because Olam has received significant investment from the government of Singapore, Olam's mismanagement of the public trust is that much less forgivable. Know this: You voluntarily came to the market, you subjected yourselves to its forces, and you must bear the consequences of your ineptitude.
We do not work for an investment bank, and cannot be bullied the way other analysts can. Our research into Olam has been exhaustive, and we plan to resolutely stand by it regardless of any attempts you might make to discredit it or us.
We therefore suggest you find better uses of your time than focusing on criticism. For instance, you might want to work on plans to reign in your CapEx and de-leverage. The clock is likely ticking.
Warmest Regards,
Muddy Waters, LLC
In the two and one-half years Muddy Waters, LLC has been openly criticizing publicly-traded companies, we have not seen a response as defensive as yours - not even from Sino-Forest. On Monday, our Director of Research gave a brief talk on Olam at a well-respected charity event. He presented facts about Olam along with Muddy Waters's opinion that Olam is at risk of collapsing due multiple factors, including its debt load. As Olam has since said, his comments were not overly substantive. But based on this alone, Olam halted its stock, scheduled two conference calls, discussed buying back shares, and issued statements that included saying it is not a "fly-by-night company". It has further evidenced a bizarre fixation on baseball caps.
Olam's disproportionate reaction is extraordinary in our experience. Should Olam come to collapse (as we believe it will), its use of much-needed cash to buy back shares at this time should give rise to questions about whether fiduciary responsibilities have been breached -- particularly given the possible existence of individual motivations that are not necessarily aligned with those of Olam's lenders. We also note Olam's attempts to impugn our credibility.
You and your investors should note that attempting to silence critics is not a plan of corrective action. In no way does it make Olam stronger. The February 2011 CLSA report, which raised far fewer concerns than we have identified internally, and that Olam itself made so controversial, should have caused you to work toward repairing what ails your business and your balance sheet. Instead, Olam has since increased its a) debt load by approximately S$900 million, b) cumulative investment cash burn by approximately S$2 billion, and c) cumulative operating cash burn by approximately S$500 million. In other words, you did the exact opposite of what you should have done. Your actions have been an abject failure of leadership.
Companies that attack criticism the way Olam does fail to understand that raising money from the public is a privilege. Because Olam has received significant investment from the government of Singapore, Olam's mismanagement of the public trust is that much less forgivable. Know this: You voluntarily came to the market, you subjected yourselves to its forces, and you must bear the consequences of your ineptitude.
We do not work for an investment bank, and cannot be bullied the way other analysts can. Our research into Olam has been exhaustive, and we plan to resolutely stand by it regardless of any attempts you might make to discredit it or us.
We therefore suggest you find better uses of your time than focusing on criticism. For instance, you might want to work on plans to reign in your CapEx and de-leverage. The clock is likely ticking.
Warmest Regards,
Muddy Waters, LLC
Similar threads
