Gold Investment Firm Placed on MAS Investors Alert List

I am more inclined to think that regulation and consumer protection are the more effective way to address such scams. No matter how much we try to educate, the bottom 10% (who either refused to be educated or are just too gullible) probably cannot save themselves. Either that or like what d.o.g. said.. let economic Darwinism do its work.

Interesting topic now on financial literacy, though it is a little OT on this thread....haha.

I would say about 6 out of 10 friends are financially literate, and this means they know what shares are, how UT and ILP work etc. Then again, most in my circle are either accountants or bankers, so that in itself already skews the results as it is not considered part of the "general population".

But out of the 6 who are financially literate, not many really bother to do their own investments, but prefer to rely on financial planners and banks to manage their funds for them. There are quite a few friends who trade actively but I am unsure if they are consistently making gains, but they are considered the more "savvy" ones.

Thus far, I do not know of any person who fell prey to such scams. Perhaps it's because it is so blatant to my circle of friends, and they are already cognizant of the risks.

I personally wouldn't advocate Economic Darwinism as there could be segments of old ppl who have punt down their life savings hoping for big gains but ended up nothing. Though its really dumb for these grp of ppl to go penniless but these ppl would become a social illness for the society to bear and perhaps they themselves would be driven to desparation.

I would advocate much stricter rules and regulations, perhaps segmenting the investors into their liquid asset net worth, their educational background as well as a simple test which investors who could not fall within the first 2 regulations could undertake to prove their investment knowledge.
Of cos if the investors pass all the 3 regulations and had their investments gone bust, then the onus would be on them and not the banks nor the government.

One thing I do not like the MAS direction is that they evidently preach a "Caveat Emptor" approach to the investors. Frankly, I do not even know what "Caveat Emptor" means until the Lehman Bros blow up. I mean.. it goes to show clearly how MAS has in its mind.

arthur Wrote:I would advocate much stricter rules and regulations, perhaps segmenting the investors into their liquid asset net worth, their educational background as well as a simple test which investors who could not fall within the first 2 regulations could undertake to prove their investment knowledge.

The fundamental problem is that the people who are peddling such products will never bother to comply with the rules, or will tweak their products to work around the rules. Their target victims are those who are greedy but not financially savvy enough to have a basic scam filter. By the time the victims realize something is wrong, it is already game over i.e. the money is gone.

Even the legitimate providers will game the system e.g. insurance agents are now required to fill out a form on the client's needs before selling them a policy. In practice most just tick the box that says "client does not want advice" and carry on as usual. The government can pat itself on the back and say that agents are now required to do fact-finding before selling policies, when in reality nothing has changed.

I guess if everyone except the investors goes around patting oneself and each other backs, we can just sit back and watch another round of "Mini bonds" bust again. If noone wants to intervene, I hope the consequences wld not go out of hand someday.
Its interesting to note tat Hong Lim was never tat crowded till the gathering of Mini bonds investors. Kinda pathetic many Singaporeans only understand money and nothing else. Someday this apathy will strike us hard in the face back.
Cheers.

(23-12-2010, 02:43 PM)Musicwhiz Wrote:

(23-12-2010, 02:27 PM)kichialo Wrote: Alert List means what? Neither here nor there, half in half out ...

Well this means they are on MAS Alert List as a possible scam, so it is to warn people to be more careful. HOwever, as mentioned, usually by the time they are on the list, it's too late for many people who may have lost tons of money!

If it is a possible scam then the regulators should go determine whether it is a scam or not. I hardly think putting it on some Alert List means their job is done and finished.

Singapore diplomat good at calling others "half in half out", yet this is a good example of half in half out. To but it more bluntly, simply not doing their job.

Wow, this is really getting a little OT. Probably time to move this to a new thread for further discussion.
I really thank everyone for their response though. It's nice hearing a range of views because of the limited sampling of personal observations (as MW has also noted), really puts things into perspective.

(24-12-2010, 12:34 AM)kichialo Wrote:

(23-12-2010, 02:43 PM)Musicwhiz Wrote:

(23-12-2010, 02:27 PM)kichialo Wrote: Alert List means what? Neither here nor there, half in half out ...

Well this means they are on MAS Alert List as a possible scam, so it is to warn people to be more careful. HOwever, as mentioned, usually by the time they are on the list, it's too late for many people who may have lost tons of money!

If it is a possible scam then the regulators should go determine whether it is a scam or not. I hardly think putting it on some Alert List means their job is done and finished.

Singapore diplomat good at calling others "half in half out", yet this is a good example of half in half out. To but it more bluntly, simply not doing their job.

The damn alert list is very long...http://www.moneysense.gov.sg/check_our_list/Consumer_Portal_IAL.html
I suppose the non-damn list is even longer.

Actually, it probably should be the other way. All unregulated persons or firms should be on the alert list.
Want to get out of the list? Show me the audited record of investment returns for the last 5-10 years.

(24-12-2010, 09:12 AM)kazukirai Wrote: Wow, this is really getting a little OT. Probably time to move this to a new thread for further discussion.
I really thank everyone for their response though. It's nice hearing a range of views because of the limited sampling of personal observations (as MW has also noted), really puts things into perspective.

Was reading through the replies and realized it's not so OT after all, as the topic does mention "MAS Investor Alert List" and the thread is still talking about that.

(24-12-2010, 09:53 AM)yeokiwi Wrote:

(24-12-2010, 12:34 AM)kichialo Wrote:

(23-12-2010, 02:43 PM)Musicwhiz Wrote:

(23-12-2010, 02:27 PM)kichialo Wrote: Alert List means what? Neither here nor there, half in half out ...

Well this means they are on MAS Alert List as a possible scam, so it is to warn people to be more careful. HOwever, as mentioned, usually by the time they are on the list, it's too late for many people who may have lost tons of money!

If it is a possible scam then the regulators should go determine whether it is a scam or not. I hardly think putting it on some Alert List means their job is done and finished.

Singapore diplomat good at calling others "half in half out", yet this is a good example of half in half out. To but it more bluntly, simply not doing their job.

The damn alert list is very long...http://www.moneysense.gov.sg/check_our_list/Consumer_Portal_IAL.html
I suppose the non-damn list is even longer.

Actually, it probably should be the other way. All unregulated persons or firms should be on the alert list.
Want to get out of the list? Show me the audited record of investment returns for the last 5-10 years.

The alert lists serve no purpose. Who actually check it? As what some forumers say, by the time it's on the list, it's too late... regulation and enforcement is needed here. it's just too cruel to see hard earned money being siphoned away, especially for those who are not financial literate.