Homepage
PR Newswire
09-07-2014, 07:38 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-07-2014, 07:49 AM by specuvestor.)
Thanks fat al
I think selling health products (see my posts in Herbalife) and selling investment products which are usually much higher value are very different things. The quantum of the latter is also much larger and well defined to be within MAS jurisdiction
Again it doesn't restrict social freedom if the test is that your company have to be registered to sell a product if u are deriving a benefit eg commission from it. I agree no regulation is able to capture 100% of the issue but like i always say, if it can deter 90% of people it is working very well. It is extremely strange for me that pyramids are illegal yet it is often marketed here, like yeokiwi pointed out. I'm not sure what is the technical issue here to have a list of registered schemes rather than a "warning list"
The only logical explanation is like what bratzz pointed out: MAS doesn't want to be liable for a scheme under its watch in the event it goes bust. Its a matter of nomenclature i think... Call it registered, conditional, shortlisted scheme rather than "approved" whatever. In fact MAS should also have a "reject" list that is open to public to further deter those who want to pull a fast one.
And again if one is selling to accredited and not retail, then this process is not needed.
I think selling health products (see my posts in Herbalife) and selling investment products which are usually much higher value are very different things. The quantum of the latter is also much larger and well defined to be within MAS jurisdiction
Again it doesn't restrict social freedom if the test is that your company have to be registered to sell a product if u are deriving a benefit eg commission from it. I agree no regulation is able to capture 100% of the issue but like i always say, if it can deter 90% of people it is working very well. It is extremely strange for me that pyramids are illegal yet it is often marketed here, like yeokiwi pointed out. I'm not sure what is the technical issue here to have a list of registered schemes rather than a "warning list"
The only logical explanation is like what bratzz pointed out: MAS doesn't want to be liable for a scheme under its watch in the event it goes bust. Its a matter of nomenclature i think... Call it registered, conditional, shortlisted scheme rather than "approved" whatever. In fact MAS should also have a "reject" list that is open to public to further deter those who want to pull a fast one.
And again if one is selling to accredited and not retail, then this process is not needed.
Before you speak, listen. Before you write, think. Before you spend, earn. Before you invest, investigate. Before you criticize, wait. Before you pray, forgive. Before you quit, try. Before you retire, save. Before you die, give. –William A. Ward
Think Asset-Business-Structure (ABS)
Think Asset-Business-Structure (ABS)