Judge GIC by its long term results

In an interview with the Sunday Times, Ng Kok Song, the retired Group Chief Investment Officer of GIC summed up his views by saying that an organisation like GIC should be judged by its performance over a longer time frame. How long is this time frame is relative and subjective, but definitely not over a year or a handful of years. This kind of view is reasonable in general for a Sovereign Wealth Fund or any funds managed by the fund managers. Investment is a long term process as against gambling or daily trading. The volatility of the assets and equities under management may fluctuate wildly in the short term or even daily when there is a major event or crisis happening. The value of the assets or funds under management could plunge or swing up in response to such events. This is equally true of big institutions, or even the performance of govts. It is thus unfair to wallop a non performing fund over a short interval of time or during a crisis.

Today’s corporate culture and practices are often based on short term performance, or at least the remuneration and reward system is geared towards an annual payout. This has resulted in the management and executives planning and working for instant rewards and instant gratification. And the accounting system and reward packages, bonuses, payouts, handouts, perks, etc etc are all based on short term results or annual results. A good performance in a year could earn the management their life time income. A poor performance in a year could earn them half a life time income. A disastrous performance in a year could earn them multiple life time incomes.

What is the problem? Many fund managers, top management, and even govts, want to be rewarded immediately, on a year to year basis. This is natural as their tenure is short and could be terminated quite quickly. And they all want to be judged over the long term so that their bad performance can be averaged out to look better over time, or maybe a windfall or a lucky streak some years ahead could turn their fortune around. Or they could have left when bad times are here or the bad times that were hidden in the books could not be hidden any longer. The Olympus Camera company is one such example.

Last year, our Govt recorded a once in a life time GDP growth rate of 15%, much higher than any country in the world. And their super world class salaries were given an added boost with super world class bonuses based on this once in a life time growth rate in a year. Like any big institutions, the next few years may end in the red, no growth or minus growth, it doesn’t matter, the big bonuses are already in the bank accounts.

I somehow think the equation or formula is not very right. I thought since performance is best to be assessed over a long term, the remuneration or reward system should also be designed to be paid out over a long term as well. Both will thus average out the performances and the rewards in the long run. Tiok boh?

Why like that one? Still cannot figure out why? Heard of head I win tail you lose? To be reasonable, honest, responsible, accountable and respectable, and to be real, rewards and bonus system of an institution or govt must be in line with the performance assessment system. If the reward is based on immediate payout for the year’s performance, then the measurement must be based on a yearly basis. If not, it is simply screwy.

I like simple logic that every layman can understand.

Sunday morning's joke of the day.

Anyone looking for a joke, please go to TRE and read the article, NTU's Professor speaks against anti immigrant policies. Ok, before I got misunderstood. It is a sick joke. Unbelieveable! I am truly astounded by the pearls of wisdom.

Our parents planted this Singapore tree for us

Singaporeans and the early migrants and the pioneering political leaders, not today's, built Singapore into what it is today. True blue Sinkies must not forget this truth. The political leadership today, many were just born yesterday with the exception of a few oldies, do not build the rich and prosperous Singapore but enjoying all the benefits and privileges that came from yesterday's sweat and tears.

Today, we are inviting so many foreign talents to enjoy the fruits of our parents' labour, the labour of yesterday's generation. And these foreign talents are here to replace the children of yesterday's hardworking Sinkies. They are all sitting in high places, earning big bucks and talking rubbish about why we need them and how able and talented they are. And to bring in more foreign talents at our expense.

True blue Singaporeans must not forget that what we are today is a gift from our parents who slogged for it and getting very little in benefits. They planted this big tree for us, not for foreigners. The foreigners did not plant the tree but are here to pluck the fruits.

True blue Singaporeans can be generous and share some of the fruits to others but not to impoverish themselves and their children and future generations to come.  Singapore is what it is today not because of the foreigners that are here today.

My Sunday morning rumbling sermon.

I have received more negative feedbacks on my tongue in cheek post that no car can be quality living. That post had gone viral in a small way, circulating quietly in some circles, disagreeing with what I said as many see car ownership as quality living. I too feel the same. The convenience of a car, to live a lifestyle free from the unsatisfactory public transport and dependency on someone else for your transport needs, is a very desirable item. Let no sycophant con you into believing that the public transport system and taxis can replace the role of owning a car. There are many other factors attached to car ownership, emotional and psychological and a sense of well being and independence, freedom.

The sycophants too will try to talk the people into believing in living in ever smaller homes that are ever more costly as progress. What is the point of reclaiming more land and expanding the social space in the island when they will be filled to the brim by more heads and bodies? Quality living must come with more space for everyone and allowing reasonable car ownership. This is one of the major reasons why people are objecting to the 6.9m population.

The crappy answers that more infrastructure and homes will be built to alleviate the problems that the people are facing now is bull shit. The whole situation will be back to square one, a crammed environment with people everywhere living in close proximity and bluffing each other that it is quality living. Why are people running away for the weekend to the North, or fly away to some islands, weekend escapees?

We need the comfort of space and more space for everyone. Not more heads and bodies to fill up whatever available space in the name of economic growth. Economic growth is to lead to better quality of life and quality living, not to become sardines in a can.

This sickening mindset got to change, got to go. While the elite have their ample private space and freedom to own their many cars, the average Sinkies are deprived from such luxuries and constantly told to make do with what they have and be happy and be grateful, and to believe that that is quality living. The Sinkies are not daft anymore and will not believe in the stupid soothsayers who are really no better than the average Sinkies but happen to be in a privilege position of power or hold a few more pieces of papers.

Walk the talk and ask themselves if they would like to live the way an average Sinkie is living, in a small flat and without the convenience of car ownership? Many young men and women are going to be very disappointed when they step into adulthood, wanting better and finer things in life only to find them unattainable unless they belong to a very exclusive and small group of elite, exceptionable abilities or from very exceptional families with exceptionable inheritance.

Gone were the days when young men of average family background could go swinging around, dating girlfriends in their cars or borrowed family cars. We need to bring back some of the convenience of the good old days, more leisure time and space, more living than working, more pleasure than pressure.

200,000 Sinkies overseas

I heard this number being thrown around at the Hong Lim Rally? What is this 200,000 number about? 200,000 Sinkies, adults and children, working adults, those emigrated, what about Sinkie students overseas? It is still a substantial number of sinkies relative to a core of now 3.3m citizens or about 6% of us. I was thinking of having them back to strengthen the Sinkie core with some carrots. Unfortunately this is going to be futile.

There is no way for these Sinkies to return and make this island their home all over again. The cost of living, the cost of buying a home, buying a car will have made many broke. Even if they have a 3,000 sq ft property in their current place of residence, liquidating the property would not be enough to buy a 4 rm HDB flat and may have nothing left to buy a cheap car. Who would want to trade their kind of lifestyle to come back home? Who would want to come home to a highly competitive and stressful little island? What quality of living? The only thing good about this island now is to make fast money and to migrate to somewhere else for a more leisure pace of life. And that is what the FTs and PRs are doing. And the daft Sinkies will be stuck here for good. Ok, I digress.

As for the young and more mobile set, having studied abroad and working there, the problem facing them would be the same. How to afford to come home? Financially it just does not make sense, or not meaningful to come back to this small place and to pay a fortune for it, in a way, to be robbed of all the savings.

This place has become too expensive for any Sinkie to return. And return for what, for more reservist duties and in camp training?

What do you think?