- Aug 3, 2011
- 8,608
- 19,291
Pretty sure that them being owned and backed by the government is a grey area. You may well be right but I don't think what you're saying is 100% fact.
They are run by sovereign wealth. Which is exactly what the Etihad is so what’s the difference ?
the difference is I know both banks, and i have accounts in both banks. and i know people who are working pretty high up in those banks (especially in OCBC).
the main difference is both bank's have shareholders who are tied to the government (under Temasek Holdings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temasek_Holdings and anything that has "Lee" in it). It means any advertising have to go through alot of red tape. They ain't coming anywhere close to what Levy wants.
i won't say its impossible. but highly, highly unlikely.
our banking sector over here is known for its security and its handling of loans. not for having huge sums of money investing in a market already saturated.
The only company from Singapore which has the chance of sponsoring a stadium would be Singapore Airlines. No one else has the capital and marketing budget to sponsor a stadium
We can't compare banks from oil-rich countries to one with ZERO natural resources. A few years ago our banks had to merge just to stay competitive.
you guys can disagree all you want, but u can ask any Singaporean if they think a company here will spend 20M of its marketing budget on a stadium. heck, that's actually $35M in our currency. and they don't get anything back from it. SIA sponsors the F1 night race, but they get some tax exemptions because it's in part of building the countries attractiveness to tourist. they get nothing back since its their own name, not the country's
and if u talk about sovereign wealth fund... the biggest one we have is GIC, which stands for the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation. so... nuff said on that.
It ain't happening. we do not have the assets to do it. sorry to disappoint you.
Last edited: