January 7, 2008
Like any proud shopper, Temasek is happy to have recognised a bargain in Merrill
Analysis of:
Temasek Supports Merrill Despite Sub-Prime Losses | www.bankingtimes.co.uk
This analysis is solely the work of the author. It has not been edited or endorsed by GLG.
Implications: This article summarises Temasek's recent equity investment in Merrill, including the price paid and future intentions. Temasek appears to be more than satisfied with its investment and is inclined toward similar investments (financial institutions undervalued due to over-estimates of subprime/CDO related losses) in the near future.
Analysis: Its not surprising that Temasek supports Merrill, despite its subprime problems. First, it has been less than a month since the investment in Merrill was announced and absent some sort of horror scenario,(e.g. the new CEO is jailed for fraud, actual losses in excess of US $500 billion are revealed and the company declares bankruptcy) Temasek is hardly going to declare its equity purchase was a mistake. Second, it would be foolish for Temasek (and other sovereign funds) not to invest in Merrill or institutions of its ilk. To date, the overly-publicised "losses" are not cash shortfalls due to non-receipt of cash due bond portfolios, but declines in market value. There is a big difference between the two. Investors that can figure it out must act quickly. Opportunities like this arise rarely, if ever, in a lifetime.
Analysis: Its not surprising that Temasek supports Merrill, despite its subprime problems. First, it has been less than a month since the investment in Merrill was announced and absent some sort of horror scenario,(e.g. the new CEO is jailed for fraud, actual losses in excess of US $500 billion are revealed and the company declares bankruptcy) Temasek is hardly going to declare its equity purchase was a mistake. Second, it would be foolish for Temasek (and other sovereign funds) not to invest in Merrill or institutions of its ilk. To date, the overly-publicised "losses" are not cash shortfalls due to non-receipt of cash due bond portfolios, but declines in market value. There is a big difference between the two. Investors that can figure it out must act quickly. Opportunities like this arise rarely, if ever, in a lifetime.
Report a Concern
More GLG News in
Financial & Business Services
Most Popular:
Source Article | Expert Analyses
Lenders reject multiple credit applications
www.guardian.co.uk
Western Digital working on 20,000 RPM Raptor
www.bit-tech.net
Sovereign Wealth Fund Assets Could Triple by 2013
www.bloomberg.com
Bank Debt Risk Rises as Writedowns, Losses Exceed $500 Billion
www.bloomberg.com
Commerzbank Plans to Sell Linde Stake, Manager-Magazin Reports
www.bloomberg.com
Spinning Disk is history
September 1, 2008
Long term implications of the credit crisis
August 26, 2008
Mortgages - How do we solve the financing issues?
August 25, 2008
Credit, Credit...Who Has Credit?
August 25, 2008
As long term investors, Sovereign Wealth Funds may have the last laugh
August 25, 2008

