« Burmese activist exiled from Singapore recieves UN refugee status | HomePage | Dismantling the myths of the PAP system »
17/02/2009
GIC loss is estimated at roughly US$33 billion
Costas Paris
Dow Jones
The Government of Singapore Investment Corp. saw an investment loss of around 50 billion Singapore dollars (US$33 billion) in 2008 as a result of tumbling asset prices around the world, two people familiar with the situation said.
"The loss on the investment portfolio last year is estimated at around S$45 billion to S$50 billion," one of the people said. "But GIC has no thoughts to sell down any of its major investments. They'll wait until they recover."
A second person said GIC's investment loss last year was "recently estimated to be similar to Temasek's."
Temasek Holdings Pte. Ltd., Singapore's other sovereign wealth fund, saw its investment portfolio fall 31%, or S$58 billion, to S$127 billion in the eight-month period ended Nov. 30, Senior Minister of State for Finance Lim Hwee Hua said last week.
GIC spokeswoman Jennifer Lewis said the sovereign wealth fund won't comment on individual investments.
GIC, whose portfolio is more than US$200 billion even after the losses, has invested heavily in distressed financial institutions Citigroup Inc. and UBS AG, expecting that in the long term the two banks would provide substantial returns.
In January 2008, it invested US$6.88 billion in convertible preferred securities of Citigroup, which at the time would have given it a 4% stake in the bank if converted to common stock.
According to a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing in late January, GIC owns a beneficial 5.3% stake, or 303.8 million shares, in Citigroup. These include preferred shares that can be converted into 261.1 million common shares. Based on Citi's US$3.49 last closing price Friday, the stake is worth US$1.06 billion.
Beneficial ownership entitles GIC to all the benefits of Citigroup stock, such as dividends, rights and proceeds from a sale, regardless of whether it is the registered owner.
In December 2007, GIC invested 11 billion Swiss francs (US$9.47 billion) in UBS mandatory convertible notes for a 9% stake in the Swiss bank. Since then UBS' shares have fallen around 75%.
According to a July SEC filling, GIC owned 7.9% or 240.2 million shares of UBS. The stake includes 228.8 million common shares that would result from the conversion of the notes.
Based on the 12.88 Swiss franc closing price Monday, that stake, if current, would be valued at 3.1 billion Swiss francs.
"Right now, these investments look very unfortunate but SWFs have the luxury of looking at the very long term," the second person said.
GIC, which manages Singapore's foreign-exchange reserves, has 34% of its portfolio invested in the U.S., 35% in Europe and 23% in Asia, according to its web site. Equities make up 44% of the portfolio, bonds 26% and real estate, private equity and venture capital 23%.
The first person said that, despite falling asset prices globally, GIC has no plans for a major investment anytime soon. "Apart from some investments in real estate not much is going on. They want to see the bottom first and there is no indication we are close to this point."
14:43 Posted by soci | Permalink | Comments (5) | Trackbacks (0) | Email this | Tags: singapore, gic
Trackbacks
The URL to Trackback this post is: http://singabloodypore.rsfblog.org/trackback/1634798
Comments
Oh yeah. This is a really sweet MasterCard Moment.
Here are the 'geniuses', paid senior executive market rates mind you, fucking up really badly, and not a single one of them is held personally liable.
Sovereign Immunity?!?
Priceless!
Posted by: Matilah_Singapura | 18/02/2009
The argument is that in order to attract the greatest minds in the world they have to be paid at higher rates than us mere mortals.
They didn't see it coming nor how quickly it would be upon them. And who do they answer to?
No one.
Posted by: soci | 18/02/2009
I thought the loss was $50 billion (GIC) plus $59 billion (Temask), i.e. total $109 billion lost due to sheer mismanagement or incompetence. Even the old man can't attribute it to complacency. Now you know why CPF withdrawal age has been postponed, and minimum sums are increased every year. Oh yeah , they want us to keep working at 90. And the clown Lim Swee Say said our CPF is safe. His may be safe, with recession proof guaranteed million $ deducted from our taxes, but we can kiss ours goodbye.
Posted by: dave | 18/02/2009
Did we forget the conflict-of-interest here? I mean the one who ran Temasek spreads her legs for the Prime Minister of the country? Why didn't anyone ever bring this up? Probably, if one is in such a murky nation, it is really hard to tell otherwise, right? Just like the Apartheid regime in South Africa! This sounds like a country run no better than Zimbabwe or Columbia or Venezeula or Pakistan - all third-world and all first-world wannabes!!
Posted by: j chan | 18/02/2009
> And the clown Lim Swee Say said our CPF is safe. <
As 'safe' as any Ponzi scheme ever created.
People are quick to judge the likes of Bernie Madoff as a crook. Yet modern governments of the world like Singapore have been running these sham 'social insurance' schemes for decades. And they do so legally, in contrast to maleficent shysters like Madoff.
By now it should be clear. But apparently it is not. Anyone who believes that the money held in a so-called 'account' at the CPF is truly theirs just because it is * in their name * is an idiot.
CPF is nothing but a TAX imposed to run a grandiose legal pyramid game, and the myth is used as a political tool by the incumbent to control the people.
> the one who ran Temasek spreads her legs for the Prime Minister of the country? <
Thanks for the mental imagery. I just threw up my lunch.
Posted by: Matilah_Singapura | 19/02/2009
Post a comment
NB: Comments are moderated on this weblog.




