Where did you obtain YOUR
''facts'' from ?
Facts can only be true, and cannot be proven wrong - are you quite
certain with what you claim to be ''facts'' ?
Do you want to have a detailed
list of grand losses that are publicly known ?
Losses are not only restricted to those loss making ventures, but
also to the payments or purchase of grossly over valued investments
that are far above market prices, or beyond reasonable market
valuation.
Do we need to make any further guesses as to why the POWER OF ONE
insist on maintaining POLITICAL Power ?
What about those that are unknown and well concealed by a SINGLE
MONOPOLY Government that stamped every piece of information as
STATE SECRET' ?
3) The initial amount of money given to Temasek is 350 million and
gov never top up tis amount after tat
Are you suggesting that Temasek's
current portfolio is a result of its own effort to grow its
original capital to the current size in its portfolio ?
If this is so, Temasek should have been more honest then to report
a mere growth of only 18 per cent for last financial year - as it
has more then S$500 BILLION under its care.
See the 3rd Paragraph on Page 4 of 38 of the following PDF report
''Enhancing Singapore's Competitivenes : Some Fundamental
Rethinking''.
In this paragraph, it states that
The Monetary Authority of
Singapore (MAS), the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation
(GIC), and Temasek Holdings Private Limited (Temasek), all report
to the Ministry of Finance, are responsible for managing
Singapore's government surpluses. Currently, accumulated government
surpluses - according to our estimate - amount to S$800 BILLION, of
which GIC manages about S$200 BILLION; MAS, which manages
shorter-term liquidity under tighter rules, manages probably
another S$100 Billion; and Temasek manages the remaining S$500
Billion, through its listed and unlisted equipty shares in
GLCs
Singapore has been making surpluses
every year, which means that Temasek's account has been topped up
every year.
You were saying ''gov never top up tis amount after tat''
?
4) Shincorp deal doesn't seem positive but the final outcome is
still unknown. We shouldn't assume it will result in complete loss
yet
The fact is clear that we paid
US$3 BILLION for Shin Corp, and since its purchase in early 2006,
the investment has been drifting in limbo.
US$3 BILLION in fixed deposit at 0.5 per cent per annum would
already have paid for the premium of a National Health and
Hospitalisation Insurance Plan; instead of paying for someone's ego
trip.
5) The story of marina bay renaming seems interesting but the fact
is the team is in charge of the strategy making for Marina bay, not
just the naming
Spending
S$400,000 to name the Marina Bay was not so clever as part of
the strategy making effort, which merely require brain storming by
a team that is probably already paid more then S$400,000.
Try harder to sound convincing
6) Suzhou loss is recuperated[/color]
With infrastructural costs planned to
be US$20 Billion since it was first planned in 1994, can this
amount be recoup in such a short time that begin since 2004, when
it was ready to receive men.
Now that the Singapore side has reduced its stake to a smaller
share, can the Singapore Government hoped to extract anything more
than what is already allocated by the Hyatt staffs.
[quote][b]
7) Actually u r right in loses such as micropolis, virgin airline
etc 
These are the corporations that
have made public their losses, and they from only the tip of the
iceberg of those highly publicized corporate losses.
There are other losses that originate from the overwhelming high
prices paid by Temasek for some of the targetted asset acquisition
plans.
However in fields such as airline (tiger airline,
jetasia) banking (indo, india, china, korea, malaysia)
telecommunication (indo, india, malaysia, phillipines) land
(capitaland spans 79 cities around globe) , they r performing very
well
Don't count your chickens before
they are hatched.
The losses that are known are already well publicized and happily
forgotten, there remains the losses that are securely kept secret
from a supposedly 'all inclusive society'.
Do u think it is a wrong policy to invest the money outside
singapore, a very small country with limited market ?
There are many opportunities for
investment, but it requires business acumen and experience to judge
the potential of opportunities.
Sadly, after so many disasters experienced, we could have been more
careful, more astute, and more diligent in the background
preparation works.
Still, these are mere spoken words, and require a game plan to put
into action.
