For advertisement

Sample

3/03/2009

Which is a better option?

GIC swop its US$6.88b prefered shares(4% if converted) to 11% ordinary shares of Citibank. At the same time it also forgo a fixed income of 7% returns for a 1c dividend that is not guaranteed. And to make matter worst, the price of Citibank immediately fell from the conversion price of US$3.25 to US$1.50, more than half the value of the prefered shares. And that is not the end of the story. Last night Citibank price fell to US$120, wiping off another 20% of its value. So technically it now has a value of $2.54b. This is only 37% of the US$6.88b. Why would GIC want to do that? Is the additional 7% of Citibank shares that much better than the fixed income of 7% which was estimated at US$480m annually? Or was there unreasonable reasons or pressure for GIC to agree to the conversion? The only way to look at this as a good move is long term. In the the long run, if Citibank price goes up, we will be getting 7% more of its worth. For the immediate, it is a frightening decision. The paper loss over two days is US$4.33b!

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Redbean, Citigroup is insolvent. It does not have any long term future to speak of. Well, it does if you contemplate going out of business as a future, then that is its future. Convert or not, either way GIC's investment is screwed, finished, kaput. Might as well write it off now while Singaporeans are still in a forgiving mood.

redbean said...

most of their banks and big corporations are now insolvent. no harm buying one at a good price and we have great talents to restructure and upturn them.

Anonymous said...

We are faced with Hobson's choice.

Someone in the US must have said:

"Catch the fools' by their balls and their hearts and minds will follow."

LOL