Skip Navigation Links
Investment policy of GIC and Temasek Holdings
17 May 2017 (129 views)

In 2011, someone wrote this email to me. I posted it in my blog. It concerns the investment policy of GIC and Temasek Holdings. I agree with his views.

QUOTE
Dear Mr Tan,
I applaud you for stepping forward to offer your candidacy in the upcoming Presidential Election. I am glad we will likely see a contest. May the best man win for the good of our homeland.

I am an investment manager and wealth manager working for a global financial institution. In the course of my professional career, I have played multiple roles including managing money for institutions and wealthy individuals. For all these investors, there are always varying investment objectives and targets as the funds always have differences in use.

This should be no different when dealing with funds belonging to the nation, hard-earned monies from our forefathers. Just like a patriarch who stores his wealth, hands over to future generations, one would imagine that the purpose (investment objective) of such a fund would be: saving for the future, saving for "rainy days" and enhancing portfolio value to retain and grow future purchasing power.

While I believe that it is beyond to remit of the Elected President to involved himself in the operations of our sovereign wealth funds, I hope the EP will question GIC and Temasek on the basis of their performance and exposure reports which I would imagine is submitted to the EP.

I echo your call to urge GIC and Temasek to adopt a more conservative investment approach instead of going for the "big bang". In lay man's term, the way I would re-phrase the investment objectives I stated above for the SWFs is : "first, don't lose money. Second, retain its value. Third, grow and enhance the value sensibly". Given these objectives, looking back, it is questionable why GIC and Temasek went "big" into investments in Citi, UBS and Merrill Lynch. 


UNQUOTE


Investment policy of GIC and Temasek Holdings
[Back] [Print]


In 2011, someone wrote this email to me. I posted it in my blog. It concerns the investment policy of GIC and Temasek Holdings. I agree with his views.

QUOTE
Dear Mr Tan,
I applaud you for stepping forward to offer your candidacy in the upcoming Presidential Election. I am glad we will likely see a contest. May the best man win for the good of our homeland.

I am an investment manager and wealth manager working for a global financial institution. In the course of my professional career, I have played multiple roles including managing money for institutions and wealthy individuals. For all these investors, there are always varying investment objectives and targets as the funds always have differences in use.

This should be no different when dealing with funds belonging to the nation, hard-earned monies from our forefathers. Just like a patriarch who stores his wealth, hands over to future generations, one would imagine that the purpose (investment objective) of such a fund would be: saving for the future, saving for "rainy days" and enhancing portfolio value to retain and grow future purchasing power.

While I believe that it is beyond to remit of the Elected President to involved himself in the operations of our sovereign wealth funds, I hope the EP will question GIC and Temasek on the basis of their performance and exposure reports which I would imagine is submitted to the EP.

I echo your call to urge GIC and Temasek to adopt a more conservative investment approach instead of going for the "big bang". In lay man's term, the way I would re-phrase the investment objectives I stated above for the SWFs is : "first, don't lose money. Second, retain its value. Third, grow and enhance the value sensibly". Given these objectives, looking back, it is questionable why GIC and Temasek went "big" into investments in Citi, UBS and Merrill Lynch. 


UNQUOTE