GIC invests $14 billion in Swiss bank UBS
-
I think we have to give GIC some due credit when it's due.Originally posted by walesa:Is it even viable to explain something blatantly to a loser (it's anyone's guess why would a loser indulge in the company of other alleged losers to begin with
) who has a knack of drawing wild parallels between distinctly irrelevant entities?
Pointlessness? That's what you're a perfect epitome of.
For someone who first extols the virtues of the rights to the freedom of expression in defence of his views to cry foul in response to seemingly different and diverse views exercised as a freedom of expression by others smacks of hypocrisy of the highest order, doesn't it? Or is that salient point even loss in your incapacitated mind? 
No doubt this is not the most opportune moment to invest in banks, but hey, please do tell me when is the most opportune moment then?
It's easy to pinpoint that moment on hindsight but in the flow of time, how do you know that the chance has not passed?
Besides, UBS wasn't as severely affected by the subprime crisis compared to other banks like Merill Lynch, Morgan Stanley and Bear Sterns. Buying a stake now when confidence is low is perhaps a good chance to press the price down a little. Why not try rewinding 2 years back and see if GIC could have gotten the same stake for this amount of money.
Sometimes let's face it, we should not oppose for the sake of opposing. Don't get me wrong by labelling me as an administration boot-licker. I, for one, feels that the current administration has some way to go before I am satisfied with them. However, with regards to this action, I think it is a good move. It may not necessarily be the best move, but hey, sometimes searching for the global optimum is way too tedious and time consuming compared to just picking the local optimum.
If you are still dissatisfied with this action, why not propose your own course of action? If you feel that you can do better, by all means, do it. I will applaud and give you due credit if you produce the desired results. -
Sure, you're entitled to your opinion just as I'm entitled to mine. Whether what they have done deserves credit, that's your call - it just isn't as far as I'm concerned. As a matter of fact, that's precisely why we are having a discourse, isn't it?Originally posted by teraexa:I think we have to give GIC some due credit when it's due.
No doubt this is not the most opportune moment to invest in banks, but hey, please do tell me when is the most opportune moment then?
It's easy to pinpoint that moment on hindsight but in the flow of time, how do you know that the chance has not passed?
Besides, UBS wasn't as severely affected by the subprime crisis compared to other banks like Merill Lynch, Morgan Stanley and Bear Sterns. Buying a stake now when confidence is low is perhaps a good chance to press the price down a little. Why not try rewinding 2 years back and see if GIC could have gotten the same stake for this amount of money.
Now, as you mention from the examples cited above, hindsight is clearly a double-edge sword. While it's easy to challenge my perspective on it being easy to criticise a decision with the benefit of hindsight, it isn't all that hard to reassess your argument that UBS isn't as badly hit by the subprime crisis too is a benefit of hindsight, isn't it?
If you're going to leverage on the benefit of hindsight to go back 2 years to see if GIC would have gotten the same stake in UBS for the same sum of money, why not look 2 weeks ahead after GIC bought a stake in UBS which would have yielded even better returns for the same capital?
Right or wrong, it's your call and ultimately, with or without hindsight, we're just coming from different sides of the coin. It too is your call if you think I've erred in my judgment, but I stand by what I said in view of the coordinated actions taken jointly by the Central Banks controlling 3 of the major currencies on the globe.
As explained above, think what you want. While I wouldn't exactly regard the UBS deal as being as foolhardy as Barclays' daft move on Barclays, the UBS deal is hardly one that will capture the imagination for a millennium either.Originally posted by teraexa:Sometimes let's face it, we should not oppose for the sake of opposing. Don't get me wrong by labelling me as an administration boot-licker. I, for one, feels that the current administration has some way to go before I am satisfied with them. However, with regards to this action, I think it is a good move. It may not necessarily be the best move, but hey, sometimes searching for the global optimum is way too tedious and time consuming compared to just picking the local optimum.
If you are still dissatisfied with this action, why not propose your own course of action? If you feel that you can do better, by all means, do it. I will applaud and give you due credit if you produce the desired results.could have gotten the same stake for this amount of money.
Lastly, just because you aren't remotely as skilled as Ronaldinho does not deny you a right to express an opinion on football, does it? If everyone had to be an established expert at a subject to express an opinion, there shouldn't be any discourse in this forum in the first place. -
Say what u like... I'm only interested in hearing a sensible reason as to why u think the deal is such a bad idea.Originally posted by walesa:Pointlessness? That's what you're a perfect epitome of. For someone who first extols the virtues of the rights to the freedom of expression in defence of his views to cry foul in response to seemingly different and diverse views exercised as a freedom of expression by others smacks of hypocrisy of the highest order, doesn't it? Or is that salient point even loss in your incapacitated mind?
We are 13 pages into the discussion and u have not put forth a single solid reason why, other than a vague, unsubstantiated claim that u think that its a poor deal and how others are so stupid to not see it. -
Could I reasonably expect sensible insights from a hypocrite who actually bothers indulging in the company of losers he so vehemently labels?Originally posted by CX:Say what u like... I'm only interested in hearing a sensible reason as to why u think the deal is such a bad idea.
We are 13 pages into the discussion and u have not put forth a single solid reason why, other than a vague, unsubstantiated claim that u think that its a poor deal and how others are so stupid to not see it.
It'd be nice if you could put forth a reason to begin with, instead of ostensibly skirting round the principles of freedom of expression when utilised to your disadvantage. Then again, that's if you could even talk sense to begin with... -
Ho ho ho... Merry Christmas. I'm not the one "skirting" any issues here, u are.Originally posted by walesa:Could I reasonably expect sensible insights from a hypocrite who actually bothers indulging in the company of losers he so vehemently labels?
It'd be nice if you could put forth a reason to begin with, instead of ostensibly skirting round the principles of freedom of expression when utilised to your disadvantage. Then again, that's if you could even talk sense to begin with...Lastly, just because you aren't remotely as skilled as Ronaldinho does not deny you a right to express an opinion on football, does it? If everyone had to be an established expert at a subject to express an opinion, there shouldn't be any discourse in this forum in the first place.
Now the best u can come up with is that u're no pro but u're entitled to an opinion as well? Of course u are... But no one is taking u too seriously until u come up with some semblance of evidence to substantiate why u think it is so.
Get this straight, talk isn't even cheap... its FREE!
U are free to talk, or post in this forum... But getting pple to believe u might take some doing at this rate.
I won't speak for the rest of the pple but I haven't seen anything of substance from u on this subject.
And I stand by my point. U are a hopeless loser if this is all that u can post after numerous questions to substantiate your point.
Why did I attempt to converse with a loser like u? Because I genuinely thought that u had a point of view that might be interesting. Guess I was wrong.
U're just all talk and no substance. -
ok point noted. i respect your right to have your own views.Originally posted by walesa:As explained above, think what you want. While I wouldn't exactly regard the UBS deal as being as foolhardy as Barclays' daft move on Barclays, the UBS deal is hardly one that will capture the imagination for a millennium either.
Lastly, just because you aren't remotely as skilled as Ronaldinho does not deny you a right to express an opinion on football, does it? If everyone had to be an established expert at a subject to express an opinion, there shouldn't be any discourse in this forum in the first place.
discourse is good until it starts sinking down to the level of personal attacks. -
Oh, you ain't skirting. You're just hopelessly flipping around evading stuff you barely comprehend. Then again, what else could you reasonably expect of a mindless loser whose desperately feeble attempt to skirt round the geist of the discussion would render it necessary to cite a quote out of context?Originally posted by CX:Now the best u can come up with is that u're no pro but u're entitled to an opinion as well? Of course u are... But no one is taking u too seriously until u come up with some semblance of evidence to substantiate why u think it is so.
Get this straight, talk isn't even cheap... its FREE!
U are free to talk, or post in this forum... But getting pple to believe u might take some doing at this rate.
I won't speak for the rest of the pple but I haven't seen anything of substance from u on this subject.
And I stand by my point. U are a hopeless loser if this is all that u can post after numerous questions to substantiate your point.
Why did I attempt to converse with a loser like u? Because I genuinely thought that u had a point of view that might be interesting. Guess I was wrong.
U're just all talk and no substance.
Given your propensity for hypocrisy, it sure is amazing you could even understand a thing being discussed. Instead of harping about your simplistic handicap to comprehend the fundamentals of "freedom of expression", your challenged intellect would certainly do well to espouse something of sensible depth on the subject beyond debating on the merits of an argument obviously lost on a natural moron. Well, that's assuming that doesn't prove too strenuous.
Yeah, and I'm indeed exercising my right to the freedom of expression by labelling you a hypocritically mindless moron in a league of your own - that by some distance too!
-
A personal attack is hardly one when the terms used are reflective of the subjects in question. As a matter of fact, they are pretty much warranted and flattering in some cases.Originally posted by teraexa:ok point noted. i respect your right to have your own views.
discourse is good until it starts sinking down to the level of personal attacks. -
Heck care., anyway the money is not ours anymore.
-
i support you.....Originally posted by CX:Now the best u can come up with is that u're no pro but u're entitled to an opinion as well? Of course u are... But no one is taking u too seriously until u come up with some semblance of evidence to substantiate why u think it is so.
Get this straight, talk isn't even cheap... its FREE!
U are free to talk, or post in this forum... But getting pple to believe u might take some doing at this rate.
I won't speak for the rest of the pple but I haven't seen anything of substance from u on this subject.
And I stand by my point. U are a hopeless loser if this is all that u can post after numerous questions to substantiate your point.
Why did I attempt to converse with a loser like u? Because I genuinely thought that u had a point of view that might be interesting. Guess I was wrong.
U're just all talk and no substance.
walesa.... you got economics background? -
walsea... from your argument u present nothing except insults... u ignore everybody point and your only point is it is your freedom to say anything u want, even rubbish. True, u can write wat u think and feel and even though it is not substantiated, but it just reflect wat a person u r.
-
UBS deal is a mandatory 2 year convertibalbe note,
CITI is Perpetual Convertertible Preferred Securities.
GIC is a creditors any time before she convert the note to shares.Then GIC has high priority to claim debts in case CITI or UBS go broke.GIC must convert UBS in 2 years,
For CITI deal,too complicated.Will expert pl share here.
I think GIC can hold the CITI security(bond) forever,unless
''After year 5, Citigroup may force conversion if its stock price exceeds 130% of the conversion price Conversion''
Do u think the down side protections ,as claimed by Tony Tan,is enough??
1.USB mandatory 2 year convertibalbe note,
http://www.ubs.com/1/e/media_overview/media_global/latest?newsId=133686
it is the details of the note:
http://www.gic.com.sg/PDF/press_101207%20-%20Terms%20of%20the%20mandatory%20convertible%20notes.pdf
Summary Term Sheet from UBS
Issuer: UBS AG or a subsidiary of UBS AG
Instrument: Mandatory Convertible Notes (the “Notes”)
Issue Size: CHF 13,000,000,000
Issue Price: 100%
Maturity: 2 years
Coupon: 9.00% p.a., payable annually
Convertible into: Registered shares of UBS AG
Payment Date: 5 business days in Zurich after the EGM
Underlying shares: Conditional capital to be created at an extraordinary shareholders meeting of the Issuer (the "EGM"), such EGM to take place no later than February 29, 2008
Reference Price: The average of (i) CHF 57.2 and (ii) the average of the three daily VWAPs
on virt-x for the three days prior to the EGM,
subject to a minimum of CHF 51.48 and a maximum of CHF
62.92.
Minimum Conversion Price: 100 % of the Reference Price
Maximum Conversion Price: 117% of the Reference Price
Mandatory Conversion at
Maturity (Redemption):At Maturity the Notes will be redeemed through conversion into Shares.
The conversion ratio applicable at maturity will be:
---if the share price is below the Minimum Conversion
Price, the par value divided by the Minimum
Conversion Price
--- if the share price is above the Maximum Conversion
Price, the par value divided by the Maximum
Conversion Price
--- if the share price is between the Minimum Conversion Price
and the Maximum Conversion Price, the par value divided by
the share price.
Early Conversion: The Notes contain market-standard provisions allowing for early at the
option of either the Issuer or the holders
Lock-up: 6 months after the Payment Date
Reset Adjustment: If UBS AG issues in excess of CHF 5 billion Shares, other equity securities
or equity-linked securities at a sale price below the Reference Price, or
additional mandatory convertible notes or equivalent instruments with a payment
rate higher than the Coupon on these Notes or a Maximum Conversion Price below the Maximum Conversion Price of these Notes, during the one year period following the announcement of the issuance of theseNotes, the Maximum
Conversion Price may be reduced, but to no less than the Minimum Conversion Price.
Offering: Private Placement2.CITI deal==Press release fr GIC
http://www.gic.com.sg/PDF/Terms%20of%20the%20Convertible%20Preferred%20Securities.pdf
Attachment to Press Release
Terms of the Convertible Preferred Securities
Offering --- Total: USD 12.5B
Dividends --- 7.00%, non-cumulative, payable quarterly, subject to adjustment in certain limited circumstances
Maturity --- Perpetual
Call Protection--- Non-callable prior to year 7, subject to a capital replacement covenant prior to year 12
Forced Conversion --- After year 5, Citigroup may force conversion if its stock price exceeds 130% of the conversion price Conversion
Premium--- 20%, subject to adjustment in certain limited circumstancesConversion Rights--- Investor may convert the preferred stock at any time prior to a redemption date at the prevailing conversion price
Transfer Restrictions & Standstills--- 6 month transfer restrictions, thereafter transfer subject to
certain manner of sale restrictions
..........................................----- Six month lock up on sale or hedging transaction
Standstills ---- Customary standstill provisions, including restrictions on acting in concert and seeking to influence management and ownership caps for each investor based on bank regulatory and foreign ownership restrictions and other provisions
Conversion Premium Reset--- There will be certain conversion premium adjustments if Citigroup issues, within one year, certain securities in excess
of USD 5B for which the reference price and/or conversion
price is lower -
Hi guys.Temasek has not been so stupid and will not be stupid also.
UBS survives rocky shareholders meeting as capital hike approved
AFP - Thursday, February 28BASEL, Switzerland (AFP)
UBS survives rocky shareholders meeting as capital hike approved
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/afp/20080227/tts-switzerland-banking-shareholders-ubs-c1b2fc3.html
Temasel is ONLY creditors to UBS and Citi,unless Temasek choose to convert bonds to stocks.Pl read my postings in this thread.
no need worry the share prices of UBS abd Citi.
Temasek can decide later to see the bottoms of these two companies.
Dunt dance with the music of western medias.
They just tell u one side of coin.This lion tell u from officail sources of UBS and CITI.
Temasek is still creditors.
-
i read some where that UBS share holders support the proposal in 2 third majority.
Unlike the Eastern Aviation which the voting has been affected by a lot of political and physical factors,like share holders find difficult to vote.
2.Temasek is ignorant so she has not bought sub prime related products.Neither Temasek is stupid.
Temasel is ONLY creditors to UBS and Citi,unless Temasek choose to convert bonds to stocks.Pl read my postings in this thread.
Pl read UBS and Temasek officail press release.
Nowadays ,western medias just attack SWF.
SG can cheer now for the approval from UBS shareholders.The major shareholders are Who's Who in world finance market.
U can be a big shareholders if u hold 0.5% of UBS share.
-
allo allo forum,
could you pls enlighting me
is sgp GIC a SWF?
-
Originally posted by teraexa:
I think we have to give GIC some due credit when it's due.
No doubt this is not the most opportune moment to invest in banks, but hey, please do tell me when is the most opportune moment then?.....
errrrrrmmmmmmmm miss teraexa,tone down a litter. too obvious liao.
peeper may suspect.
keep lo profile.
shhhh....
-
For UBS
Currently the share price is 33.86 Swiss francs
minimum of conversion price is 51.48 Swiss francs.
This implies if the share of UBS share is 10 Swiss francs, GIC must still convert at 51.48 Swiss francs.
Its an opening for loss if the sub prime problem persists.
Critics probably have to wait 2 years before they can blast GIC.Nevertheless the conversion price is not good.
PS: Warren buffet did say he declined to buy the banks because he feels the subprime problem is not over yet.
Jim Rogers says he knows people at GIC and thinks they are not very smart. Should only buy when they hit the bottom
-
87% of votes casted support injections from GIC!!
Zurich/Basel, February 27, 2008, 07:00 PMExtraordinary General Meeting of UBS AG
At the Extraordinary General Meeting on 27 February 2008, the shareholders of UBS AG approved the proposal by the Board of Directors to create conditional share capital for the issuance of mandatory convertible notes. They also approved the Board of Directors’ proposal to replace the cash dividend with a stock dividend. The special audit proposed by Ethos and Pictet Funds S.A. into UBS AG’s exposure to the US mortgage market failed to gain an absolute majority. 6,454 shareholders attended the Extraordinary General Meeting, representing 710,145,376 votes.
At the Extraordinary General Meeting on 27 February 2008 in Basel, the shareholders of UBS AG approved the issuance of mandatory convertible notes and the distribution of a stock dividend. Both measures are key components of the program announced on 10 December 2007 to strengthen UBS AG’s capital base.
Capital increase for the issuance of mandatory convertible notes
UBS shareholders approved the creation of conditional share capital for the issuance of mandatory convertible notes with a value of CHF 13 billion to the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation Pte. Ltd. and an investor from the Middle East. The proposal received 87.18% of the votes cast. The minimum conversion price is CHF 51.48 and the maximum conversion price has been set at 117% of that figure, namely CHF 60.23.
GIC and PAP may fool u.
But the UBS shareholders will not fool themself!!
-
87% of votes casted support injections from GIC!!
Zurich/Basel, February 27, 2008, 07:00 PMExtraordinary General Meeting of UBS AG
At the Extraordinary General Meeting on 27 February 2008, the shareholders of UBS AG approved the proposal by the Board of Directors to create conditional share capital for the issuance of mandatory convertible notes. They also approved the Board of Directors’ proposal to replace the cash dividend with a stock dividend. The special audit proposed by Ethos and Pictet Funds S.A. into UBS AG’s exposure to the US mortgage market failed to gain an absolute majority. 6,454 shareholders attended the Extraordinary General Meeting, representing 710,145,376 votes.
At the Extraordinary General Meeting on 27 February 2008 in Basel, the shareholders of UBS AG approved the issuance of mandatory convertible notes and the distribution of a stock dividend. Both measures are key components of the program announced on 10 December 2007 to strengthen UBS AG’s capital base.
Capital increase for the issuance of mandatory convertible notes
UBS shareholders approved the creation of conditional share capital for the issuance of mandatory convertible notes with a value of CHF 13 billion to the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation Pte. Ltd. and an investor from the Middle East. The proposal received 87.18% of the votes cast. The minimum conversion price is CHF 51.48 and the maximum conversion price has been set at 117% of that figure, namely CHF 60.23.
GIC and PAP may fool u.
But the UBS shareholders will not fool themself!!
-
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
87% of votes casted support injections from GIC!!
GIC and PAP may fool u.
But the UBS shareholders will not fool themself!!
You seem to be lacking alot of stuff in between your ears.
UBS shareholders make decisions for their OWN benefits.
What makes you think that there is a goal alignment between PAP and UBS for the ultimate benefits for Singaporeans?
You mean if you are a UBS shareholder based in say Switzerland, you will be concerned about whether Singaporeans have made positive returns by investing in UBS?
So if UBS Board of Directors deems that share issues for the benefit of UBS shareholders, at the expense of Singapore's investment funds. The UBS Board is making decisions benefitting the Singapore government (ultimately the citizens)?
You ever heard the adage "empty vessels makes the most noise"?
Little wonder why you are aptly called "lionnoisy".
-
yup.. the GIC is an SWF
-
i'm thinking of buying some UBS shares, what do u folks think?
I asked for advice at www.secondopinion.asia and was told they do not advise on specific stocks and recommended its less risky to diversify and buy certain ETFs instead of listening to my stockbroker...