Losing money investing CPF money

In a ministerial dialogue session, or is it pre election dialogue, a Mr Goh claimed that he lost $350k from his CPF account! This is the strangest thing I have heard so far. I always read glowing reports about CPF members making money from investing in the stock market. And since the stock market always go up in the long run, and the return, as was used to justified in the liberation of the CPF investment scheme then, would always be much more than bank savings. I remember some figures quoted then was something like 25% to 30% in the long run. The scheme started in 1986, revised to include an Enhanced Scheme in 1993. Now it is 2010, average about 20 years since it started, should be long run enough to make money, not 25% but should be at least 10%! Why got people lost so much one? This is really the first time such a big number in losses is reported, and only when a loser admitted it himself. How many more losers out there who have lost their life savings in the hundreds of thousands since the scheme started? Oh, the scheme was revised to downwards in 1997 to protect the CPF members from losing more of their life savings. Talking about smart Alecs.

Sheng Siong, the people’s choice

Sheng Siong came into the supermarket business with a bang. It sold goods and sundries at prices that are more competitive than NTUC FairPrice. It soon gained a big market share and expanded into several markets to the relief of price conscious consumers. At last they have a choice for cheaper products. The latest foray of Sheng Siong was to buy over 5 wet markets from the HDB. There were initial fears that Sheng Siong would upgrade these wet markets like the big property developers do as their trademark modus operandi, and then everything becomes more expensive with a quality and better badge hanging on its door. This fear soon proved to be unfounded as Sheng Siong said it would keep them as they are, cheap wet market without the modern aircon and cleaner environment that come with a different price tag. The relief was a bit short lived but through no fault of Sheng Siong. It did kept to its position of not changing the wet markets to aircon markets. But the takeover of the wet markets is costly. It was reported in CNA that Sheng Siong had no choice but to increase the rentals of the stalls in the wet markets by a whopping 30%. It has to as it has to pay bank interest, maintenance fee, property tax and probably legal fee as well. There was a big outcry in cyberspace when this was announced as the cost of higher rental must surely be passed to the consumers. Some even talked of boycotting Sheng Siong. Overnight, the Robin Hood of small time consumers and housewives who need to buy their food and sundries has lost its glamour and brand name. What a shame. But business is business. Sheng Siong will soon become a bigger player, maybe a global player and providing jobs for the people. The people should be thankful to have Sheng Siong instead of feeling betrayed. Well done Sheng Siong, for the takeover. The consumers will be better off, in the long run.

The fall guys are usually the small guys

The Hongkong authority have arrested two female employees of Bank of China for selling the Lehman Minibonds 'on suspicion that they had fraudulently or recklessly induced others to invest money.' This Lehman fallout is becoming a joke in the whole wide world. Only the small guys got caught and no one else. What about the people who created this scam? Oh cannot call it scam. It is sophisticated financial instruments thought out by the best talents in America, for sophisticated clients with the knowledge, intelligence and appetite to lose big. So the note creator is innocent, the banks who allowed the notes to be sold are innocent, the regulators too are innocent. Only the small salesmen and saleswomen are guilty. This must be the bigger scam than the Lehman Minibond scam itself.

A good policy is a good policy

Hsien Loong revealed that certain groups have sent emails to pressurise the govt to lower property prices and threatened not to support the govt in the next general election. And it is likely that these people are going to benefit or profit from lower HDB prices. The only people I see that could benefit from lower HDB prices are those that were caught gasping for air when HDB prices galloped away. With so many govt help and subsidy schemes, this aggrieved group should be very small. The group that are going to benefit more with high HDB prices and should be pushing the govt would be owners of HDB flats. Then they can sell them at huge profits and migrate to somewhere cheaper. Beach camps are also a good alternative. Hsien Loong’s main message is that people should not pressure the govt to act in any way. This is a sure fail tactic. The govt will probably stick to its gun no matter how well meaning or logical is the course to take. It is better to write to Reach and make a genuine plea, and the govt will listen better. It even gives awards to good contributors. The high price HDB policy is going to stay. It is the best policy that benefits all flat owners. And buyers can be assured of getting their flats in 3 years instead of 7 years. And the govt believe so, and will likely to be campaigning for this policy in the next general election. They have to after Mah Bow Tan and HDB have so successfully defended this position and turning around will be self defeating. The govt’s view is firm. Whether the people believe so, or some people believe so and some don’t, let this be the election issue to be decided by the votes. Let there be no pressure but a contest of ideas. Those who believe that this policy is good and the way to go, continue to vote for the govt that is promoting it. Those who don’t agree can vote otherwise. It is just a govt’s position and policy.

Who is talking strange?

There is no property bubble, yet. Did anyone see the elephant inside the classroom? No, where got elephant? Property prices are hitting the roof, demands are incessant looking at the queues at property launches despite the record releases of new BTOs. Maybe it is all carefully managed and expected. Within expectation. The govt will not intervene in the property market and if it does, ‘we do it only because we want the market to work better’ said Mah Bow Tan. So no need to panic, no need to complain, the market is working better. Better for who and in what ways? The govt did not intervene when the population shot up by more than 1m people. The govt did not intervene by building more flats to meet the demand. Maybe it was managed to be that way. Or maybe they did not know that the population had grown disproportionately and no need to intervene. The govt prefers to leave it to market forces, supply and demand. The two cases of Ten Mile Junction and Tampenis were an aberration. The low demand was not due to market forces. And the developers will buy low to sell at big proft. Cannot be like dat. So when the prices are low when there is no demand, don’t release the sites. Afterall the govt has the responsibility to make sure that state land gets a good price. All perfectly sound argument. Not talking strange. And today, there is no property bubble yet. Everyone is happy, the govt is happy, the developers are happy, the speculators are happy, the home buyers are happy, the owners of all properties are happy. We have a perfect situation with everyone happy. This is how clever the property market it being managed. I am not talking strange either.