Singapore Exchange (SGX)

[Bubbachuck]

We can now focus on company's value without worrying on its price. Hello blue chips. [emoji106] [emoji1]

[specuvestor]

Some countries have been doing unit shares like US to Australia to India

The consideration for lot size was mainly due to the minimum commission, and also some companies don't want too many small shareholders. (Whether u own 1 share or 1k share u are entitled to same AGM Buffet) Some US brokers charge on per share basis rather than minimum comm, and what HK did was interesting to Rusal by implementing high lot size to deter retailers

The number of "trades" would be "higher" but shouldn't be a big issue nowadays due to technology. For example in the past a buyer of 10k shares would be hit by 10 sellers MAX resulting in 10 trade transaction numbers. For unit share it is actually theoretically possible to get hit by 10k sellers with 10k different transaction. In both cases the buyer only "see" one trade, but if there is problem with the trade, broker and SGX will have to trace the transactions

10 years ago i was lamenting to my friend that there were 3 agents that are overpaid: shares, insurance and properties. Brokers were in the process of being cut to size with electronic trading, separation of IB function after dot com, and then discount broking. Agents have to eat and I think as of now there is little meat left in the broking industry to cut before quality gets marginalised. OTOH insurance agents are WIP currently while housing agents need to rationalise much further

Good agents are actually very important. I would rather pay a good broker with good insight or corporate/ research access than pay half comm for transaction only. There is value for good advise from good experienced agents. Problem happens when there is no differentiation and u pay same comm for a noob and an old bird.

[benjy]

Ok, I'll put it in another way. What are the considerations against going to unit share? Why is there a need to stick to the concept of lot size which is likely based on physical script (but we've gone script-less so long ago).

There is still cost per transaction, even though it is smaller than before.

The same concept as mechanizes are sold in package, rather than in pieces, for small value and low margin items.

It seems like the consideration of trading in board sizes, are in the interests of the company/brokerages, rather than the investors (what's new!?). Generally, it seems like the algorithm matching will be more tedious/need higher bandwidth, and also the companies' IR needs to do more work (desemination of ARs, circulars etc) are the main considerations as unit size gets lower....

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/boardlot.asp
http://www.mas.gov.sg/news-and-publicati...ading.aspx

----------------------------------------------------------------

Yes. Especially for those who buy shares by paying up front. They should reduce the brokerage charges. There is no risk for the TR/remiser or broker at all. They only incurred cost for providing the trading platform. In future if they implement the platform when the sell trade is linked to the account holder CDP holdings directly.; there will also not be any risk for the remiser/dealer or broker. Hence the brokerages charges should also be reduced. For value buddies, I doubt we use the 3 day window period for contra trading anyway since we tend to buy and hold for longer periods than swing or short term traders.

Our dear brokerages need to continue to incur costs support all their analysts...or else, where got our nice nice BUY reports for us to feel good after reading?

Never take analyst reports at face value. By the time it is published, the information is already factored it. The retail investor in most cases is the last one to get the So call 'TIPS'. Always do your own home work and analysis/stock picks. In any case, you do not know the motivations for the analyst to write the sell or buy reports of the companies. If they recommend a 'buy', then they would have bought into it before getting the rest to follow to chase the price up; if they recommend a 'sell', they could be shorting the stocks and highlighting the factors, why they think it is a junk stock. And if they are 'not vested', there is no weight to their recommendations at all i.e they are not confidence in what they stand for.

[CityFarmer]

Never take analyst reports at face value. By the time it is published, the information is already factored it. The retail investor in most cases is the last one to get the So call 'TIPS'. Always do your own home work and analysis/stock picks. In any case, you do not know the motivations for the analyst to write the sell or buy reports of the companies. If they recommend a 'buy', then they would have bought into it before getting the rest to follow to chase the price up; if they recommend a 'sell', they could be shorting the stocks and highlighting the factors, why they think it is a junk stock. And if they are 'not vested', there is no weight to their recommendations at all i.e they are not confidence in what they stand for.

The usefulness of analyst report, depend on the answer sought after.

Mr. Buffett quoted “Never ask a barber if you need a haircut.”, but it should be sensible to ask barber on hairstyle trend etc

Analyst reports are an important reference for my investment decision, not from the target price (TP) and rating, but the additional info obtained by their analyst briefings and factory visits.

[CityFarmer]

The proposal should be a win-win to SGX, bond issuers and retail investors...

(vested)

SGX proposes greater retail access to bonds
Singapore Exchange (SGX) is consulting the public on a proposal to give retail investors improved
access to bonds currently offered only to institutional and accredited investors (“wholesale bonds”).
Leveraging on Singapore’s position as a leading listing venue for bonds with its AAA long-term credit
rating and robust regulatory framework, the proposed framework will improve access in two ways.
First, retail investors can purchase SGX-listed wholesale bonds initially denominated in $200,000 or
above in smaller lot size six months after their listing (“seasoned bonds”). Second, SGX proposes to
allow issuers to make subsequent offers of new bonds on the same terms as the seasoned bonds to
retail investors directly. Eligible issuers will be able to offer bonds more efficiently to retail investors
through this framework.
http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/20140901...eID=313207

[greengiraffe]

On paper yes but short term will be another disaster waiting to happen since there is already a bubble forming in the domestic bond market just like globally.

Will be very cautious...

The proposal should be a win-win to SGX, bond issuers and retail investors...

(vested)

SGX proposes greater retail access to bonds
Singapore Exchange (SGX) is consulting the public on a proposal to give retail investors improved
access to bonds currently offered only to institutional and accredited investors (“wholesale bonds”).
Leveraging on Singapore’s position as a leading listing venue for bonds with its AAA long-term credit
rating and robust regulatory framework, the proposed framework will improve access in two ways.
First, retail investors can purchase SGX-listed wholesale bonds initially denominated in $200,000 or
above in smaller lot size six months after their listing (“seasoned bonds”). Second, SGX proposes to
allow issuers to make subsequent offers of new bonds on the same terms as the seasoned bonds to
retail investors directly. Eligible issuers will be able to offer bonds more efficiently to retail investors
through this framework.
http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/20140901...eID=313207

[specuvestor]

Wonder if retails need to declare accredited before buying corp bonds

[pianist]

no need, I believe going by the recent consultation paper

[greengiraffe]

http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/premium/...s-20140905

PUBLISHED SEPTEMBER 05, 2014
HOCK LOCK SIEW
SGX, take a leaf or 2 from other bourses

WHEN looking at ways to enhance disclosures in the Singapore stock market, it is often instructive to study practices in other stock exchanges to see if any can be adopted for the local bourse. One useful suggestion came from a BT reader a fortnight ago.
In a letter to the paper, the reader proposed that the Singapore Exchange (SGX) follow the Indian authorities and disclose for each stock the proportion of trading that involves shares for actual delivery. If adopted, this would offer investors a more accurate picture of the true demand for a counter as the volume for actual delivery would exclude all speculative activity, particularly contra trading.
With such information, investors can gauge the level of speculative activity at any one time in any one stock before they make their investment decisions. An enhancement to this might be to show the amount of volume generated by proprietary traders since these parties typically enjoy lower brokerage fees and therefore hold an important cost advantage over average retail players.
Another area which could do with added and improved disclosure is the short-selling volume. Currently, SGX requires short sales to be marked as such and, irrespective of whether the positions are closed immediately afterwards, these trades are included in a Daily Short Sell report that is published online the following day, then compiled in a Weekly Short Sell report at the end of the week. Well-intentioned though this practice may be, it is of very limited use.

[cfa]

http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/premium/...s-20140905

PUBLISHED SEPTEMBER 05, 2014
HOCK LOCK SIEW
SGX, take a leaf or 2 from other bourses

WHEN looking at ways to enhance disclosures in the Singapore stock market, it is often instructive to study practices in other stock exchanges to see if any can be adopted for the local bourse. One useful suggestion came from a BT reader a fortnight ago.
In a letter to the paper, the reader proposed that the Singapore Exchange (SGX) follow the Indian authorities and disclose for each stock the proportion of trading that involves shares for actual delivery. If adopted, this would offer investors a more accurate picture of the true demand for a counter as the volume for actual delivery would exclude all speculative activity, particularly contra trading.
With such information, investors can gauge the level of speculative activity at any one time in any one stock before they make their investment decisions. An enhancement to this might be to show the amount of volume generated by proprietary traders since these parties typically enjoy lower brokerage fees and therefore hold an important cost advantage over average retail players.
Another area which could do with added and improved disclosure is the short-selling volume. Currently, SGX requires short sales to be marked as such and, irrespective of whether the positions are closed immediately afterwards, these trades are included in a Daily Short Sell report that is published online the following day, then compiled in a Weekly Short Sell report at the end of the week. Well-intentioned though this practice may be, it is of very limited use.

Some choose not to declare their short position , how can SGX know ? This practice is as good as useless.