Investment & Risk (2)

These few days there were plenty of news about these investors who might lose all the money. They all mentioned that the bank advisors told them that their savings were safe. But fixed deposits also safe, how come they didn't put their money there.

Because these investments could give them higher returns. But no investors mentioned this. I guess because it would make them look greedy and no one wants to admit it. Maybe they would just get a bit more. But whether large amount or small amount, it is still greed. Or even if it is just some free gifts.

It is not wrong to try to get higher returns but when things turn bad, cannot everything blames it on people misleading you.

Furthermore, whatever the advisors said investors should know there are risks. Perhaps the only thing is that they didn't know they could lose everything.

Although I feel sympathetic for the investors, I think investors should bear 70% responsibility.


If this becomes a court case, the bank will have to defend itself.

Now the bank says it will take resposibility if there were wrong-doings but if goes to court the bank will try to prove that the investors themselves have to bear greater responsibility. They might be cross-examined by defence lawyers.Then it is no use for investors to appeal to emotions or say that it is all their life savings. And I think there are two things unfavourable to the investors:

1. Besides being 'misled' into thinking the investment was safe, another reason for investing in the product was because the investors were attracted by the high interest.

2. Since it has a higher interest than fixed deposits, investors should know there is some risk. Even if LB had not collapsed their investments would have dropped considerably in value.

So, even if the investors win the case, the most optimistic outcome is they get back 50% of their capital. They might lose the case too.

If I were an investor I would rather wait and see what the bank has to offer me.

Some investors want to band together to get a lawyer to negotiate with the financial institutions. I don't think it will help them to get more compensation or to get it faster as the FIs say they will look at it case by case. Even if those who band together have the same profile, there may be things they don't want to disclose to each other, like if they have invested in similar investments before.

Investment & Risk (1)

If you want to buy a household item, a TV set for example, most probably you would look for a reliable brand or at least a brand you are quite familiar with.

How come investors put all their savings or so much money in something they know little about. It was reported that the highest sum was $500,000 and some actually had intended to put their money in fixed deposit. All this sounds illogical.

Some were misled thinking that their investments were safe.

Or some just believed whatever the sales officers said. And some investors talked as if they don't understand English well and the officers explained in English. All the more they shouldn't sign right away. Why not go home and discuss with family members first. This looks more like foolishness of the investors.

I'm sure not all are misled. Maybe some are aware of the full risk and they want to take it.

I think investors should bear 70% of the blame. They are lucky if they get back 30% of their money back. The MAS could punish the banks or their officers but I doubt the Court could rule that the banks return all their money.

The Dormitory is not a prison

More selfishness and discrimination ....

"Please don't build the dormitory, the foreign workers will make noise to disturb our peace, the buses will pollute air in our estate. They will dirty the place and commit crimes."

"Please don't let them come into our estate."

Hear what some people say? Build a fence round the dormitory, they say, and on weekends make arrangements to take them far away. Isn't this absurd? Treating foreign workers like prisoners. Can't the workers take a stroll round the estate to relax?