Comments on: GIC Report 2010/2011

By: Martin Lee

Martin Lee — Sat, 06 Aug 2011 23:50:35 +0000

Dear Nuts,

I think if you factor in inflation, the real return would be close to 0% or even negative. 🙂

By: Martin Lee

Martin Lee — Sat, 06 Aug 2011 23:49:15 +0000

Norman,

Probably the government would have done better by using investing all their reserves into gold. Don’t need for all the staff at GIC and Temasek.

By: Martin Lee

Martin Lee — Sat, 06 Aug 2011 23:48:19 +0000

Sender,

I always felt that the existence of two mega entities in the form of GIC and Temasek Holdings is unnecessary. I can understand having one but why do you need to have two when it adds another layer of costs?

By: Martin Lee

Martin Lee — Sat, 06 Aug 2011 23:46:30 +0000

Jason,

I think we have to see who even gets the COE to run in the first place.

By: sender

sender — Tue, 26 Jul 2011 07:03:11 +0000

Well, in life, things mostly become obvious on hindsight. But that’s not to excuse GIC’s so-so performance. Having said that, GIC investments are held widely with alot of it believed to be US Govt bonds guarantee to give low returns.

Well, Tony Tan was in-charge of GIC for past many years. He is now running for elected President; and if you think he steered GIC poorly, then you got to think whether you want him to be your elected President?