Why CPF Investors can only attend as observers?

[HitandRun]

I didn't blame CPF. I am just wondering if it is worth it to invest using CPF with the high charges that investment banks charges.

For me, it was well worth it. Based on the dividends I am receiving, I am getting 3X of what the 2.5% CPF is paying. In fact, I always accused CPF rules of not allowing me to invest more!!!

If you are interested in attending AGMs, a low cost way is to buy 1 or 2 shares of the counter from the unit share market.....

[dzwm87]

Well, if you are not going to use the CPF savings soon, then isn't there so many alternatives to beat the 2.5% which CPF is paying?

[CY09]

I was searching the web but could not find much answers to my query. What are the reasons that CPF investors can only attend as observers in AGM/EGM without voting rights? Isn't CPF money our own money as well? Why are we been sidelined and could not even ask any questions during AGM/EGM as well?

Shares being bought using CPF $$$ is held by the CPF approved nominees(DBS, OCBC, UOB).
The banks are the custodians not CPF.

It is the same as those who trade using standard chartered bank online trading.
http://www.standardchartered.com.sg/pers...n/faq.html

At least if I trade with SCB, I can pay lesser commission charges but if I buy using CPF, I would need to pay $2 per stock per quarter and higher charges as well. Certainly think that it is not worth it to buy stocks using CPF. What would you all think?

you can't blame CPF for high charges. CPF can't control how much UOB/DBS/OCBC charge you.

Just wondering since CPF approved our 3 local banks as CPF nominees. Do you think CPF could consider Stanchart (SC) as a nominee under the CPF umbrella, assuming Stan chart continues its no minimum commission brokerage structure. This is because the commissions that CPF investors will fork out is lower than the other three. This helps Singaporeans to preserve capital. Secondly, since currently shares purchased under SC is already held under a SC custodian acc, adding CPF members under this should not be much a problem.

Possible downside to this proposal could be that SC is not one of our 3 local banks meaning possible regulatory problem and the fact that our 3 local banks are tied back to SG roots since they are local.

[CityFarmer]

I was searching the web but could not find much answers to my query. What are the reasons that CPF investors can only attend as observers in AGM/EGM without voting rights? Isn't CPF money our own money as well? Why are we been sidelined and could not even ask any questions during AGM/EGM as well?

Shares being bought using CPF $$$ is held by the CPF approved nominees(DBS, OCBC, UOB).
The banks are the custodians not CPF.

It is the same as those who trade using standard chartered bank online trading.
http://www.standardchartered.com.sg/pers...n/faq.html

At least if I trade with SCB, I can pay lesser commission charges but if I buy using CPF, I would need to pay $2 per stock per quarter and higher charges as well. Certainly think that it is not worth it to buy stocks using CPF. What would you all think?

IIRC, the $2 charge is fee as custodian of CPF shares. The trading commission still base on trading broker used. So even no trading done, as long as the CPF Investment Scheme account exist, the fee is payable.

IMO, The $2 is fixed cost, and should not be an issue for most investor.

[Muck]

Well, if you are not going to use the CPF savings soon, then isn't there so many alternatives to beat the 2.5% which CPF is paying?

Not really many alternatives if you consider that the CPF savings are virtually risk-free.

[weijian]

Not really many alternatives if you consider that the CPF savings are virtually risk-free.

Good point made. Maybe i am just been sceptical or prudent, but it seems like the lull of low interest rates and high inflationary expectations, seem to have encouraged an elevated mode of risk taking in recent times.

[Vseeker]

can consider Citydev NCCPS,
esp. if you have idle OA funds,
and you are VERY CERTAIN that you will NOT need to utilise them at short notice (eg. to service home mortgages).

at curr price of $1.11 for NCCPS, and annual pref div at 3.9c each
=> effective yields = 3.51% p.a. plus possibility of potential huge capital gains upon a Company Trigger Conversion.

Disadv: it can be quite illiquid, it is a perpetual preference, with Conversion into ord. shr only at the SOLE OPTION of the Company.

for more details: refer to Citydev NCCPS thread

[Some-one]

Finally some good news

Mr Tharman also highlighted changes targeted at encouraging greater shareholder activism among retail investors.

These include putting in place a multiple proxies regime for indirect investors, including CPF investors.

Nominee companies and custodian banks will be allowed to appoint more than two proxies so that indirect investors can be appointed as proxies to participate in shareholders' meetings.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/s...84/1/.html

This should be long overdue.

[steven]

can consider Citydev NCCPS,
esp. if you have idle OA funds,
and you are VERY CERTAIN that you will NOT need to utilise them at short notice (eg. to service home mortgages).

at curr price of $1.11 for NCCPS, and annual pref div at 3.9c each
=> effective yields = 3.51% p.a. plus possibility of potential huge capital gains upon a Company Trigger Conversion.

Disadv: it can be quite illiquid, it is a perpetual preference, with Conversion into ord. shr only at the SOLE OPTION of the Company.

for more details: refer to Citydev NCCPS thread

can use for bank ncps?

[freedom]

then I wonder how many proxies a registered shareholder can appoint now? less than nominee account? then it is not fair...