Back

Latest Forum Topics / Shen Yao    Last:0.002 --

Post Reply

ThinkEnv name change to Liongold Corp Post Reply Rate topic
cccx123 Veteran	24-Nov-2013 18:19        cccx123 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Aren't you missing the point? The force selling resulted in a sudden influx of stock in usually illiquid counter/s. And sgx exacerbated the selling and reduced the buying power by declaring them designated counters. Unless you are warren buffet or some ultra rich banker superstar, how are you ever going to come up with hundreds of millions of dollars in so short a time frame? By the time everything crashed, it was too late to hold the price as the market was then washed with huge numbers of scripts. I honestly do not understand the part about bringing your own cash and getting a buyer. In the end, GS will still receive cash for the collateralized stocks. wanglausern      ( Date: 24-Nov-2013 18:10) Posted:   Under the circumstances, time was of the essence and the only way the two Su Lings could  redeem their position was to bring in cash and not a so-called buyer. Am talking out of my experience in dealing with investment banks.  terencee      ( Date: 24-Nov-2013 17:25) Posted: Don't forget Goldman refuse to accept the buyer from Hong Kong. If the bank really have the client interest at heart, they would have agreed to let the Hong Kong buyer take over the shares instead. They refuse and force sell even more.. That goes to show how much they want the price to drop.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
wanglausern Senior	24-Nov-2013 18:16        wanglausern About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	The Chairman of Innopac, the CEO of IPCO, executive director of Blumont, independent director of Liongold  all bought into ABL in a big way before the collapse. MAS & SGX should investigate. terencee      ( Date: 24-Nov-2013 17:25) Posted: Don't forget Goldman refuse to accept the buyer from Hong Kong. If the bank really have the client interest at heart, they would have agreed to let the Hong Kong buyer take over the shares instead. They refuse and force sell even more.. That goes to show how much they want the price to drop. cccx123      ( Date: 24-Nov-2013 16:48) Posted: The force selling led to the plunge..so yea. Without the forced selling the trio would probably still be billion dollar companies today. And there was apparently no margin call on Goldman's part. Banks are supposed to allow three days (usually) for their clients to top up their variation margin accounts. Goldman gave but 7 minutes. Tell me, what can you do in 7 minutes?
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
singa9999 Member	24-Nov-2013 18:11        singa9999 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	just now ( 530-6pm) was watching this program on Banks on BBC......how BIG the banks have become.....thinking they are invincible....how they did NOT act in their clients' interests in the UK on interest rate swaps etc......people now asking for smaller banks which focus really on the CLIENTS' interests......others worried that that may make mortgage loans more expensive etc......some claims have been paid eg one GBP347,000 by  one banks......many other claimants waiting in line etc .  All the new Chairmen of all the big banks LLYODS, BARCLAYS etc etc.....keep on ranting the new MANTRA ---- we should really focus on the clients' interests !!!  Is GS aligned to all these " new mantra" or it thinks it is just too-clever & need not follow all this !!!!!  Our Govt MUST side the investors & ensure GS or whoever did all the " wrong" on the trio & more, be better punished -----  UK Govt is now very people focussed, our Govt also should , since TRUTH & JUSTICE are much more powerful & leads to SUSTAINABILITY over the longer term, than all the GS's all-combined !!! wanglausern      ( Date: 24-Nov-2013 18:10) Posted:   Under the circumstances, time was of the essence and the only way the two Su Lings could  redeem their position was to bring in cash and not a so-called buyer. Am talking out of my experience in dealing with investment banks.  terencee      ( Date: 24-Nov-2013 17:25) Posted: Don't forget Goldman refuse to accept the buyer from Hong Kong. If the bank really have the client interest at heart, they would have agreed to let the Hong Kong buyer take over the shares instead. They refuse and force sell even more.. That goes to show how much they want the price to drop.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
wanglausern Senior	24-Nov-2013 18:10        wanglausern About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Under the circumstances, time was of the essence and the only way the two Su Lings could  redeem their position was to bring in cash and not a so-called buyer. Am talking out of my experience in dealing with investment banks.  terencee      ( Date: 24-Nov-2013 17:25) Posted: Don't forget Goldman refuse to accept the buyer from Hong Kong. If the bank really have the client interest at heart, they would have agreed to let the Hong Kong buyer take over the shares instead. They refuse and force sell even more.. That goes to show how much they want the price to drop. cccx123      ( Date: 24-Nov-2013 16:48) Posted: The force selling led to the plunge..so yea. Without the forced selling the trio would probably still be billion dollar companies today. And there was apparently no margin call on Goldman's part. Banks are supposed to allow three days (usually) for their clients to top up their variation margin accounts. Goldman gave but 7 minutes. Tell me, what can you do in 7 minutes?
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
singa9999 Member	24-Nov-2013 18:10        singa9999 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	just now ( 530-6pm) was watching this program on Banks on BBC......how BIG the banks have become.....thinking they are invincible....how they did NOT act in their clients' interests in the UK on interest rate swaps etc......people now asking for smaller banks which focus really on the CLIENTS' interests......others worried that that may make mortgage loans more expensive etc......some claims have been paid eg one GBP347,000 by  one banks......many other claimants waiting in line etc .  All the new Chairmen of all the big banks LLYODS, BARCLAYS etc etc.....keep on ranting the new MANTRA ---- we should really focus on the clients' interests !!!  Is GS aligned to all these " new mantra" or it thinks it is just too-clever & need not follow all this !!!!!  Our Govt MUST side the investors & ensure GS or whoever did all the " wrong" on the trio & more, be better punished -----  UK Govt is now very people focussed, our Govt also should , since TRUTH & JUSTICE are much more powerful & leads to SUSTAINABILITY over the longer term, than all the GS's all-combined !!!
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
cccx123 Veteran	24-Nov-2013 18:00        cccx123 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Sgx still looking for always to make the public forget their mishandling of the saga. If public don't want to or cannot forget then they're probably searching for ways to deflect blame. Maller      ( Date: 24-Nov-2013 17:54) Posted: Has SGX has not reply on the investigation yet?
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Maller Member	24-Nov-2013 17:54        Maller About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Has SGX has not reply on the investigation yet?
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
terencee Master	24-Nov-2013 17:25        terencee About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Flexible   Mood: Yells: "I don't entertain trolls."
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Don't forget Goldman refuse to accept the buyer from Hong Kong. If the bank really have the client interest at heart, they would have agreed to let the Hong Kong buyer take over the shares instead. They refuse and force sell even more.. That goes to show how much they want the price to drop. cccx123      ( Date: 24-Nov-2013 16:48) Posted: The force selling led to the plunge..so yea. Without the forced selling the trio would probably still be billion dollar companies today. And there was apparently no margin call on Goldman's part. Banks are supposed to allow three days (usually) for their clients to top up their variation margin accounts. Goldman gave but 7 minutes. Tell me, what can you do in 7 minutes? wanglausern      ( Date: 24-Nov-2013 16:13) Posted: Bank loan agreements are written to give the lenders  the right to make margin call immediately or within reasonable time.  The time to make repayment by the borrower is written clearly in these agreements to prevent dispute.  Banks have all the right to protect themselves against material adverse events without prejudice to the borrowers. If Goldman Sach didn't force sell initially and let the events unfold in that three days of plunge, they would now face heavy  losses incurred  by their clients.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
cccx123 Veteran	24-Nov-2013 16:48        cccx123 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 1  Alert Admin	The force selling led to the plunge..so yea. Without the forced selling the trio would probably still be billion dollar companies today. And there was apparently no margin call on Goldman's part. Banks are supposed to allow three days (usually) for their clients to top up their variation margin accounts. Goldman gave but 7 minutes. Tell me, what can you do in 7 minutes? wanglausern      ( Date: 24-Nov-2013 16:13) Posted: Bank loan agreements are written to give the lenders  the right to make margin call immediately or within reasonable time.  The time to make repayment by the borrower is written clearly in these agreements to prevent dispute.  Banks have all the right to protect themselves against material adverse events without prejudice to the borrowers. If Goldman Sach didn't force sell initially and let the events unfold in that three days of plunge, they would now face heavy  losses incurred  by their clients.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
wanglausern Senior	24-Nov-2013 16:13        wanglausern About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Bank loan agreements are written to give the lenders  the right to make margin call immediately or within reasonable time.  The time to make repayment by the borrower is written clearly in these agreements to prevent dispute.  Banks have all the right to protect themselves against material adverse events without prejudice to the borrowers. If Goldman Sach didn't force sell initially and let the events unfold in that three days of plunge, they would now face heavy  losses incurred  by their clients.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Bigmama Master	24-Nov-2013 15:57        Bigmama About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Penny recovery starting tomorrow! srichipan      ( Date: 24-Nov-2013 11:49) Posted: A lot of focus on GS now. On the other hand I think it will chiong up tmr. Cause the fall in price was not justified. Without the force sell it won't happened. I see value in liongold
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
sharefrenz Member	24-Nov-2013 14:19        sharefrenz About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	the story (stock price/vol) is already history. next is what u going to do. not much meat left for the shortist. but longist may soon smell the meat. make ur own jugement and play with care. take cover when whale or shark appears or just swim with them. that's what the ikan billis like many of us can do.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
zillion Member	24-Nov-2013 13:34        zillion About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	we welcome foreigners. we open our arms wide wide to welcome them. if not this teeny weeny island is long gone bypass by funds. their only way of making huge $$$ is sgx must allow them to attack and attack and abandon then come back again at super ridiculous levels repeating cycles etc. Bigmama      ( Date: 23-Nov-2013 22:19) Posted: Should SGX take action against Goldman?
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Wisely Member	24-Nov-2013 11:53        Wisely About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Combined   Mood:
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Honestly, we dun know the whole story...   Based on assumption only:-  1> so coincidence that they open account acc with GS? Could it be possible under instructions from someone else?  2> would GS be so daring to sell off the stocks without authorization? unless someone who holds lots of stock starts to unload first to trigger a margin call? 3> Next the selling comes after the directors have open account with GS so zhun meh and the pricing of the share in SGX that force the directors to top up or force sell.   Again all these are just based on assumptions.....i believe MAS should look into who trigger it first.  cccx123      ( Date: 24-Nov-2013 11:26) Posted: Well, Goldman has faced lawsuits as a result of their roles trading against their clients when they sold synthetic CDOs. Most of these claims were successful and Goldman had to reimburse their losses. Though like you or someone else said, Goldman still profited in the end even after accounting damage claims. Their risk management and control is unlike any I have ever seen before. sharefrenz      ( Date: 23-Nov-2013 23:33) Posted: cccx123, i agreed with u abt force selling the trio shares including other force selling that make the price collapse. but the fiduciary duty - that's subjective, insider info.- holding directors shares as colatoral i don't think is insider info. hence, at the end of the day, i guess, nothing much can be done legally. ethically, that's another story.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
srichipan Master	24-Nov-2013 11:49        srichipan About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 2  Alert Admin	A lot of focus on GS now. On the other hand I think it will chiong up tmr. Cause the fall in price was not justified. Without the force sell it won't happened. I see value in liongold
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
cccx123 Veteran	24-Nov-2013 11:26        cccx123 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Well, Goldman has faced lawsuits as a result of their roles trading against their clients when they sold synthetic CDOs. Most of these claims were successful and Goldman had to reimburse their losses. Though like you or someone else said, Goldman still profited in the end even after accounting damage claims. Their risk management and control is unlike any I have ever seen before. sharefrenz      ( Date: 23-Nov-2013 23:33) Posted: cccx123, i agreed with u abt force selling the trio shares including other force selling that make the price collapse. but the fiduciary duty - that's subjective, insider info.- holding directors shares as colatoral i don't think is insider info. hence, at the end of the day, i guess, nothing much can be done legally. ethically, that's another story.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
ysh2006 Senior	24-Nov-2013 07:16        ysh2006 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	The bank has asked the case of OHL to differ a while waiting for private negotiation. Will the same thing happen with the UK case too?....private compension ? 'Huat ah ' for this three stocks  if sucessful... Bigmama      ( Date: 23-Nov-2013 22:07) Posted: Now the reason for the crash is not about the company but because of Goldman action? Bad Goldman? Now can buy the trio?
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
sharefrenz Member	23-Nov-2013 23:33        sharefrenz About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	cccx123, i agreed with u abt force selling the trio shares including other force selling that make the price collapse. but the fiduciary duty - that's subjective, insider info.- holding directors shares as colatoral i don't think is insider info. hence, at the end of the day, i guess, nothing much can be done legally. ethically, that's another story.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
cccx123 Veteran	23-Nov-2013 23:10        cccx123 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Sharefrenz, you are missing the point. It is not about shorting per say. It is because Goldman misused the information and leverage it had due to its provision of margin facilities to the directors who pledged massive numbers of shares for loans for personal gain. You can say they breaches a fiduciary duty and utilized insider information profit. Do you honestly think they if Goldman had not force sold the director shares the value of the companies will collapse so substantially? Both companies had extremely limited floats and were relatively illiquid before the whole saga. Where do you think all the shares came from? I can bet you a tenner they were due to margin calls and forced sales not just from the directors, but also from other shareholders. Goldman had the advantage over other banks because it held as collateral millions of stock belonging to the trio's directors. Now, it is all a matter of whether sgx and MAS or even CAD and CASE dare to take on the big boy. Based on experience, they will probably shove the issue aside and try to divert the public's attention to other matters. Notice how muted everything seems? In other countries there would have been an outcry with the press having a field day. Here? Hahahaha.. Wisely      ( Date: 23-Nov-2013 22:44) Posted: will there be somebody whose working for the funds and are friends to GS? Providing tips? sharefrenz      ( Date: 23-Nov-2013 22:31) Posted: on what basis can sgx take action with the shortist? shorting is legal with borrowed shares. even naked short, u r subject to ($1000) fines and sgx bought-in. furthermore, force selling clients shares pledged as collectoral got nothing to do with sgx. most likely scenerio after investigation, no wrong doing parties ......
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Wisely Member	23-Nov-2013 22:44        Wisely About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Combined   Mood:
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	will there be somebody whose working for the funds and are friends to GS? Providing tips? sharefrenz      ( Date: 23-Nov-2013 22:31) Posted: on what basis can sgx take action with the shortist? shorting is legal with borrowed shares. even naked short, u r subject to ($1000) fines and sgx bought-in. furthermore, force selling clients shares pledged as collectoral got nothing to do with sgx. most likely scenerio after investigation, no wrong doing parties ......
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me

                                                         First   < Newer   101-120 of 719   Older>   Last