Saturday, June 04, 2005

Comments on Cat Danny's Investment Strategy

Some commentators in the previous post had problems with Cat Danny's seemingly simple minded investment strategy. For example:

************************************************************************************
Anonymous said:

It Seems that Danny the Cat(and Coalition) doesn't know his numbers:

Using your example:

Principle:$100
End Principle: $176

Increase before taxes: 76%

End Principle after Tax(20% tax on yield): 160.8
Effective percent increase in capital: 60.8%
(Coalition forgot TAXES!!!!!)


Begininng Tuition Fee: P17000 or $708.33 (@24PHP:1USD)
End Tuition Fee: P69,000 or $1254(@55PHP:1USD)
Increase: 77%

Increase in Money (60.8%) can't cope with Tuition Fee Increase (77%)

This doesn't include trust fees,administrative fees, and the like.

By your own example, you killed your own logic that you can find an investment that can match tuition fee hikes.

Coalition should try and try again until you can create something that seems logical.

************************************************************************************************
We thought it best to bring back Cat Danny and have him respond to the rebuttal of above commentator...


Cat Danny Explains Posted by Hello



"Dear readers,

Oh dear, I probably should stick to opening real piles of garbage rather than the PPI garbage heap. But it's good for the kids who may be reading the blog to pick up a few lessons in discussing the comment above:

a) For those who have ever been members of a debating club, Ms. Reyes' article in Philstar is not debatable because people interested in coming up with a counter argument do not have the free access to information that she has had. At best, we can say that it is a paid notice since the claims are hard to verify independently.

b) For debate, I used publicly available information. As you can see from the commentator above, he or she can now look at information I've presented and try to draw different conclusions. Now, that is what I call fair and transparent;

c) Using the commentator's own counter-argument, he has calculated a gap of 16% (77% increase in tuition less 61% increase in portfolio). Let's stay with this for the moment.

Readers should recall the original claim of PPI. They said that due to the runaway inflation in tuition, they were constrained to cut back on their payments. When PPI issued its initial stop payment order, my masters only got 50% as tuition support instead of the PhP69,000 that they were expecting (which is what I used in my example by the way).

As I said, I'm a cat with the small brain of a cat. Not even my simple-minded investment strategy could manage to create a hole of 50%. I believe that is exactly the point of asking for a full and transparent audit of the activities of the trust management professionals.

d) If you want to use my simple-minded investment strategy, I work cheap. A can of tuna every other day is sufficient for me as investment management fees. Now, you have to considerthe fact that the experts in investment management, who get paid very well, now only need to play devise just something slightly smarter and they can already make up for the 16% gap.

As Mr. Jose Cuisia said in Dong Puno's show the other month, "there has to be accountability for results".

e) On the question of taxes, aren't there are many tax free alternatives that could have been used?
1. FCDU time deposits (taxed at 7.5% withholding only recently);
2. Foreign Currency Investment Management Accounts that could have been used to invest in these Tbills;
3. Special Series Treasury Bills and Notes;
4. 5 years + 1 day bank time deposits that paid out coupons without withholding, etc. etc.

The point here is that there are similar investments that can be substituted in my analysis that would not be subject to taxes either and are already readily available in the Philippines.

It is up to the investment manager now to figure out the best way to figure out the best legal vehicle to purchase these assets for the planholders. Again, they're well paid to do that...I'm just a cat with a small brain.

f) Finally, the correct term is principal not principle. Don't want the kids going around with bad spelling (sorry...I'm being catty, it's a bad hair day!!!)

g) I hope that my original strategy and this explanation are logical.

Thanks for listening,

Danny
************************************************************************************

We trust that the above response will continue to fuel questions in all our minds regarding the competence and ethics of the trust management professionals who had the fiduciary responsibility over the planholders' assets.

Obviously, this week, we have pounded hard on the performance of the trust managers and will continue to do so because this is one of the keys to solving this deepening mystery. A mystery which can only be answered and have trust and confidence restored to this battered industry by way of a no holds barred audit of the trust operations.

We try to strike a balance in this blog in the interests of stoking debate such as the one mentioned here. This blog is still a research and information site. As the readers have noticed by now, the items posted do not have a uniform tone and this is done deliberately in order to get points across and to elicit comments such as the one above in order to have a further discussion.



109 Comments:

At Saturday, June 04, 2005 10:46:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Pacific Education Plan
Nangako ng kinabukasan

Binenta sa kapwa Pilipino
ni Ambassador Yuchengco

Binayaran namin ng limang taon
Ngunit ang pangako bukas ay tinatalikuran ngayon

Ang aming perang inihulog
Kasamang nadurog

Na YUCHENGCO kami
Ng may-ari ng RCBC
Si Alfonso Yuchengco
at Helen Yuchengco Dee

 
At Saturday, June 04, 2005 11:35:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There has never been proof of any investment manager that can consistently outperform the market. But now we have proof of investment managers who are idiots and fraud artists. Pati mga amo nila.

 
At Saturday, June 04, 2005 11:56:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Other proofs of idiocracy by the yuchengcos : 1. Losing PDCs of clients upon trannsferring of loans from RCBC to RCBC Savings 2. How a clerk in their buendia branch can single-handedly steal more than P70M worth. 3. Buying Bankard which led to losses of over P3B. 4. Putting up RCBC Plaza when the market is down. 5. Involving RCBC in a political scandal via the peace bonds. 6. Buying Napocor bonda (which they now want to dump on us!) The list goes on..... It's only a matter of time.

 
At Saturday, June 04, 2005 2:09:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

in response to:

"The point here is that there are similar investments that can be substituted in my analysis that would not be subject to taxes either and are already readily available in the Philippines."

The issue is finding an investment vehicle that matches tuition fee hikes. All the investment options above do not cope with tuition fee hikes.

Answer the issue: specifically state the investment vehicle net of all taxes that copes with tuition fee hike. Or is it back to your smoke and mirrors diversionary tactics since you know you are wrong. This is my dare to you that will not be challenged

 
At Saturday, June 04, 2005 2:28:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I use to reason out for the pro-rehab.
Until it dawned on me that the officers of the company are also convincing themselves with the way they try so hard to reason out for the company that what Helen Yuchengco is doing is right.

Hindi kasi sincere ang pag-co-convince nila sa mga agents ko na tama talaga ang ginagawa ng company. Nakaka-tabang na.

Now i say...keep in mind guys, Pacific Plans will not honor their end of the contract on paying your children's tuition expenses for the second sem of this school year and
School year 2006- 2007
School year 2007- 2008
School year 2008 -2009
School year 2009 -2010
School year 2010 -2011
School year 2011 -2012
and so on.

I like what Conrad Banal ( read inquirer today )is doing. He is keeping the coalition so focused on its objective. Kahit na ano pa isulat niya sa dyaryo, no matter how he defends Yuchengco, the point remains, PPI will not honor its end of the contract in paying out your children's tuition expenses for the second sem 2005-2006
School year 2006- 2007
School year 2007- 2008
School year 2008 -2009
School year 2009 -2010
School year 2010 -2011
School year 2011 -2012
and so on.

The more he defends Yuchengco, the more the public will be aware na si Yuchengco nanloko ng tao.
Di tumupad sa contrata.
Tinabangan na ako.
Madami pa sa mga ahente ko ang tatabangan.
Ang baba na ng benta namin.
NA-YUCHENGCO din pala ako.

May the force be with you.

 
At Saturday, June 04, 2005 2:54:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Answer the issue: specifically state the investment vehicle net of all taxes that copes with tuition fee hike." - Unlike what YGC would like everybody to believe, this is actually not the issue. This is the BIG EXCUSE! The issue is non-obligation of contract and fraud.

 
At Saturday, June 04, 2005 2:57:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the one that is asking for proof of investment returns keeping up with tuition hikes.

Are you telling me that it is okay to loan from RCBC and then default b/c my business is not earning enough?

 
At Saturday, June 04, 2005 3:01:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Are you telling me that it is okay to loan from RCBC and then default b/c my business is not earning enough?" -

Yes, next time we can all tell RCBC : "Sorry but my ROI in my company is only 5% as oppossed to the 15% loan rate you gave me. Here, have some nice NAPOCOR bonds instead. What? You want the assets of my company? Sorry, I gave that to my other company. Why kill two companies when you can kill only one?"

 
At Saturday, June 04, 2005 3:28:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To continue the conversation w/RCBC : "My other company has much more creditors and employees. So I transferred the assets with good intentions since it will benefit more people. Also, the other creditors there charge only 10% unlike your exorbitant 15%. Here, take the NAPOCOR bonds, it's for the good of everybody."

 
At Saturday, June 04, 2005 3:30:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"c) Using the commentator's own counter-argument, he has calculated a gap of 16% (77% increase in tuition less 61% increase in portfolio). Let's stay with this for the moment."

Good. You agree that investments can’t match tuition. Now let us talk gaps below.

"As I said, I'm a cat with the small brain of a cat. Not even my simple-minded investment strategy could manage to create a hole of 50%. I believe that is exactly the point of asking for a full and transparent audit of the activities of the trust management professionals."

Because the cat forgot that tuition support is only partial payment towards the whole first semester tuition fee. Therefore,your logic on the 50% hole is wrong .

 
At Saturday, June 04, 2005 3:33:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

And hence if the return on my business is lower than the loan rate charged by RCBC, I have the right to default and transfer assets to another company!

 
At Saturday, June 04, 2005 3:36:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh sorry, I forgot : I have to give RCBC NAPOCOR bonds after I default and transfer assets!

 
At Saturday, June 04, 2005 4:04:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Are you telling me that it is okay to loan from RCBC and then default b/c my business is not earning enough?" -

yes, because whever you loan you need collateral which approximates the value of the loan. so,when you default,bank gets money back thrrough collateral.

Planholders arw getting their money back + interest

 
At Saturday, June 04, 2005 5:36:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh great! Can I use my Pacific plans as collateral?

 
At Saturday, June 04, 2005 10:33:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

the issue, as most intelligent people here will understand, is NOT what kind of investment vehicles will make what amoubt in X time.

tama na ang pag bratinella mo, get your head out of your you-know-what. hindi yung ang issue ok, o ayan tagalog na.

aside from other points raised, eto pa. the business of a pre-need company and an insurance company is to ANTICIPATE risks. agree naman tayo dito diba. if they don't do that, paano na profits nila? klaro naman diba?

e ang problema, hindi naman na-ANTICIPATE ng PPI na tataas ang tuition fee. e ano yun?! poor management on their part. kabobohan. dapat talaga magsara na lang sila.

 
At Saturday, June 04, 2005 11:25:00 PM, Blogger SunTzu said...

Yes to Mr. "What investment type will match tuition fee hikes"

As the person before me said, it is not only the investment managers who should be blamed as PPI management should have foreseen the tuition fee hikes would spiral way past inflation.

Who made the contract in the first place FOOL?

Who isn't abiding by the agreement LAME BRAIN?

If there is nothing wrong and nothing to hide, then get PPI to open its books to an independent panel of auditors - assuming they understand the meaning of full disclosure, transparency, prudence and good father of the family.

BTW in 1997 continuing past to 1998, how high were interest rates at that time? Were they not past the 20-30% range for long term T-Bills as the government was trying to keep the $/Peso FX rate in check? PPI and inv. manager should have taken a lot of those into their portfolios dont you think?

Shoo - Shoo Bow wow!!!

 
At Sunday, June 05, 2005 1:25:00 AM, Anonymous vagabond said...

Everybody can talk about legalese and financial gobbledygook but it will still amount to BS. When you come down to basics, it will still come down to the basic issue of TRUST. Not the condom, the value of TRUST.

When you go to Jolibee, or McDonald’s and you give them your money, they give you a burger or a value meal, or whatever it is you bought and paid for. It is easy to see what your money’s worth.

When you go to Pacific Plans or Malayan insurance or RCBC, you give your money and all they give you is a promise that at some future date, they will give you such and such amount in return for the X amount you will give to them at this given date. In the case of Pacific Plans traditional planholders, the promise was for payment of school fees whatever they were at the time of availment.

You don’t really get anything except a PROMISE from the provider. That is the nature of PRE-NEED, INSURANCE, and BANKING. It is anchored on TRUST.

But now, it would appear that Pacific Plans, and whatever incarnation it is in now, chooses to renege on its commitment to its clients. This, after its clients had shelled out good money for its many sweet promises..

So what does this make of Pacific Plans, and the guys who backed it up? The guys who promised to fulfill the promises its agents made that the kids would go to school no matter what?

It would appear that the promises were empty, that the assurances that the YUCHENGCO name guaranteed fulfillment of the contract were not reliable. That indeed, The YUCHENGCO name was not worth the paper it was written on!

Whatever financial hurdy gurdy or legal gobbledygook they may invoke, the guys behind Pacific Plans will still have to go back to the basic question: They promised us that they would send our kids to school no matter what..

WE KEPT OUR PART OF THE BARGAIN, THEY SHOULD KEEP UP TO THEIRS. IT IS AS SIMPLE AS THAT.

 
At Sunday, June 05, 2005 9:23:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This thread started as a speculation of what PPI could have done to maximize investment opportunities. Let me take it to a slight tangent: what they actually did in 2003 and 2002.

According to their 2003 FS audited by Cunanan, among the assets in their trust funds were:
1. Loans and discounts of P130,211,957 in 2003 and P144,383,891 in 2002 (net of doubtful accounts of P42,544,266 in 2003 and P40,049,181 in 2002)
2. Other receivables of P84,952,709 in 2003 and P102,365,740 in 2002 (net of doubtful accounts of P12,868,280 in 2003 and P5,972,986 in 2002)
3. Combined doubtful accounts for 2003 was P55,412,546 and for 2002 was P46,022,167.

While these are relatively small amounts in comparison to the total trust fund assets of P15.7B in 2003 and P13.2B in 2002, one wonders why:

1. 25% of the 2003 loan portfolio was considered doubtful versus 22% of the 2002 loan portfolio

2. 13% of the 2003 other receivables was considered doubtful versus 6% of the 2002 other receivables

3. 20% of the combined 2003 loans and other receivables was considered doubtful versus 16% of the combined 2002 loans and other receivables.

Who were the recipients of these loans and other receivables? Why is the ratio of doubtful accounts so high? And even higher in 2003 than in 2002?

 
At Sunday, June 05, 2005 10:15:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

RCBC is a-brewing. Many employees (a good majority of them)are plan holders. Even as they seem quiet, they cannot hold on indefinitely especially in the face of Helen Dee's withhunting and oppressive tactics. They will blow up soon and turn RCBC into smithereens. Sobra na!

 
At Sunday, June 05, 2005 10:42:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In response to:

"BTW in 1997 continuing past to 1998, how high were interest rates at that time? Were they not past the 20-30% range for long term T-Bills as the government was trying to keep the $/Peso FX rate in check?"

From BSP website:

T-Bills
364-Days (interest rates excl. withholdoing taxes)
from: http://www.bsp.gov.ph/statistics/speiy_02/sdir_9203.htm

1993 14.105
1994 13.965
1995 13.402
1996 13.409
1997 13.632
1998 17.397
1999 11.704
2000 11.800
2001 11.981
2002 6.822

Notice that there was only one year that rates were above 15%. If you consider taxes, there will be not a single year where interest rates are greater than 15%.

 
At Sunday, June 05, 2005 10:50:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tama na yang BS na "no investment ekek could match tuition fee hike." Luma na yan. Kahit totoo pa yan, e sino ba ang nangako?

It is not the duty of planholders to ensure that PPI could meet it's promises. Nowhere in the contract does it say "we will pay you provided we are able to make a similar return." We made our payments based on the PROMISE that we will be paid such amount. Said promise was never conditional. Breach of contract and fraud - plain and simple. No need to compute.

 
At Sunday, June 05, 2005 11:28:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Answer the issue: specifically state the investment vehicle net of all taxes that copes with tuition fee hike."

** ALAM NI HELEN NA PALPAK YUNG MGA TRUST INVESTMENTS NILA AT MAGKAKAPROBLEMA SA TRADITIONAL PLANS. ALAM NIYA NA KAILANGAN MAGDAGDAG NG EQUITY PERO MAS PINILI NIYA YUNG PANLOLOKO AT PAGGAMIT NG KAPANGYARIHAN AT PERA UPANG MANG-ISA SA MGA PLANHOLDERS.

 
At Sunday, June 05, 2005 4:09:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To catbrain danny and his birdbrain owner:

Galing nyo! Keep it up!

Biro mo, both of you went out of your way to prove na ang gagaling nyo. (in your own minds na nga lang, sabit pa..)

Nice try though. =)

 
At Sunday, June 05, 2005 6:43:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

For the information of those planholders who were not able to get their 2nd check and for 1st time availees:

PPI will be releasing the additional tuition fee support on tuesday, June 7, 2005 at the Phil. Trade and Training Center, Roxas Blvd. Go there at once, coz who knows PPI management may change their mind again.......

 
At Sunday, June 05, 2005 6:50:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

No matter what the paid hacks say, without a doubt PPI is at fault in not making good with their COMMITMENT to pay the tuition of our children. With that fact established, what do we planholders do now? Do we wait for the courts cases to prosper which might take a decade with the high caliber lawyers of YGC. Or do we get to a compromise. I dont know if this is acceptable to all: PPI pays NOW the amount they promised to pay in 2010. Will that suffice? It will take a long time for court cases to prosper. The marcos case is a classic example as it has been close to 20 years already! And nobody in their family have been imprisoned. I dont think we can sustain a protracted court battle. I think we will have to deal with this reality. It is useless to keep on establishing PPI's fault because everyone, even our dog, know they committed fraud by not honoring their commitments and manuevering to transfer to LIFETIME. But as planholders what do we do NOW?

 
At Sunday, June 05, 2005 7:15:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"c) Using the commentator's own counter-argument, he has calculated a gap of 16% (77% increase in tuition less 61% increase in portfolio). Let's stay with this for the moment."

In reply, pro-PPI said
"Good. You agree that investments can’t match tuition. "

Sagot: Yun naman pala eh, sinong may problema therefore? Yung Planholders? Nope, it's PPI. Alam ninyo pala na may problem investments catching up with tuition, bakit sobrang taas ng GAE expenses ninyo all throughout? Bakit tuloy ang ligaya sa commission expenses? Bakit daang milyon yung dividend pay-outs to the owners? Bakit NAPACOR ang binili, na walang cash flows sa near term? Bakit hindi giniwaan ng paraan na i-mitigate yung problem habang tuloy and pagtapon ng pera sa ibang bagay? Maraming taon ang lumipas, marami puedeng gawin, pero mukhang walang ginawa.

Kasi nga, ang balak ay takasan ang planholders as evinced by PPI asking legal opinion from a renowned legal office to not pay the obligations to planholders.

Sabi ng isang blogger (na mukhang pro-PPI):

"From BSP website:

T-Bills
364-Days (interest rates excl. withholdoing taxes)
from: http://www.bsp.gov.ph/statistics/speiy_02/sdir_9203.htm

1993 14.105
1994 13.965
1995 13.402
1996 13.409
1997 13.632
1998 17.397
1999 11.704
2000 11.800
2001 11.981
2002 6.822
Notice that there was only one year that rates were above 15%. If you consider taxes, there will be not a single year where interest rates are greater than 15%.
Sunday, June 05, 2005 10:42:14 AM "

Sagot: Ganuon naman pala eh, bakit 15% NET OF TAXES discounting ang ginamit ng PPI to value the ARL? Ang ibig sabihin ay sa palagay ng PPI, kaya nila ito. O, problema ba ng planholders kung hindi nila magampanan ito? Hindi, problema ito ng PPI. E kung alam naman pala nila hindi nila kaya ito, bakit 15% ang ginagamit nila? Hindi kaya isang uri na naman ito ng panloloko? Para siguro lumabas na mababa ang liabilities... at para tuloy ang ligaya habang may nilulutong deception.

At sa huling banda, ang tunay na issue ay ang long-term mismanagement ng PPI at ang pag-violate nila ng lehitimong kontrata sa pamamagitan ng mga paraang madumi. Wika nga ng SEC, "They did not come to the court with clean hands".

Sa madaling salita, sadyang manloloko ang PPI at ang mga kampon nito dito sa ating blog at sa ating yahoogroups (at wag ninyong sasabihing wala, may prueba na!)

 
At Sunday, June 05, 2005 7:23:00 PM, Blogger SunTzu said...

To the smart one who posted the one-year BSP rates - BRAVO! You know how to copy and paste.

Now only a stupid investment manager would go about investing in one year T-Bills knowing fully well that most of the funds would not be used for a long time ie only 14,000 of the 34,000 are availing this year. The rest way down the road. So at that time, PPI should have looked at least 5, 7 and 10 years.

So little doggie - go look at the longer term maturities and share the info with us.

 
At Sunday, June 05, 2005 7:23:00 PM, Blogger SunTzu said...

To the smart one who posted the one-year BSP rates - BRAVO! You know how to copy and paste.

Now only a stupid investment manager would go about investing in one year T-Bills knowing fully well that most of the funds would not be used for a long time ie only 14,000 of the 34,000 are availing this year. The rest way down the road. So at that time, PPI should have looked at least 5, 7 and 10 years.

So little doggie - go look at the longer term maturities and share the info with us.

 
At Sunday, June 05, 2005 7:46:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr. Philip Piccio will have an interview with Mr. Ricky Carandang of ANC, Channel 21
tomorrow, June 6, at 9am. Please watch.

 
At Sunday, June 05, 2005 9:06:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

OFW couple trusted in Pacific Plans

First posted 00:35am (Mla time) May 18, 2005
INQ7.net


I AM currently working and staying overseas with my family. Owing to the uncertainties of living abroad as contract workers, my husband and I decided to invest part of our savings in educational plans from Pacific Plans Inc. for our children's future.
We have been paying religiously for our children's educational plans without any delay and are even encouraging our fellow contract workers here in Brunei to get an educational plan for their kids, to secure their future. We were shocked and dismayed to see in Philippine news that there are some loopholes going on. All the while, we were left in the dark, with no one at Pacific Plans to inform us of what was going on.

If such a thing is happening to a big and long-running business like the Yuchengco group, how can you expect Filipinos to invest their money in our country? Is there no more hope for the Philippines? Can the government intervene in this problem? It is not Alfonso Yuchengco who will be suffering but the many Filipinos, including children, who had trusted Pacific Plans to help them have a brighter future.

MARIA THERESA MONTEMAYOR, Bandar Seri Begawan, Negara Brunei Darussalam

 
At Sunday, June 05, 2005 11:16:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think it is useless defending arguments against PPI BECAUSE most if not all believe they fooled people and should be jailed, electrocuted, hanged, shot, what have you. We are wasting so much energy and time pleading our case. It is obvious to all (the hacks excluded- because they are paid to defend) that our case is strong, correct and moral. What we need to explore now is the short term plan. What do we do now? We all want the HEAD of alfonso yuchengco, Helen Dee, the other Yuchengcos, their henchmen, etc. But do we have the CAPACITY to even bring them to attend court hearings? With public opinion ON our side, we should force them to compromise. Whatever that compromise is should be the immediate goal now. Or do we fight a protracted war? ITs useless to be saying this and that against YGC i repeat, because even our dogs know they are at fault. Unless he his a paid hack, i dont think anybody in his right mind will agree PPI did right (no pun intended).

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 8:21:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"What investment type will match tuition fee hikes"

PPI came to us, offered an educational package to shoulder the tuition fee needs of our kids no matter how much it will cost in the future.

Aside from which they claim "YUCHENGCO yan- maasahan!"

All this argument about investment versus yields is part of their PR moves to divert attention.

We have a contract. As a planholder, we sacrificed and worked hard to be able to pay the monthly premiums of PPI, now it's PPI's turn to live up to their obligation to pay the tuition fees of our kids!

-didn't you guys notice? All those columnist who wrote in favor of PPI are stating the same thing with the exact wordings? Uniformed defense! Uniformed mistakes!

For YGC it is more profitable to reneged on their obligation since it is cheaper to pay off these media people, corrupt judges, inept and greedy politicians.

They can always drag the case till no one will care anymore.

In the mean time, just stop doing business with all Yuchengco Group of Companies. Do not honor RCBC checks and close all your accounts with them and transfer it to Metro or BPI! Get your insurances out of Malayan, Do not consider Mapua for your kids- anyway the quality isn't there anymore!

Convince your friends and relatives to do the same.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 9:48:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Madami pa sa mga ahente ko ang tatabangan.
Ang baba na ng benta namin."

E di magresign ka na kung ganyan reklamo at maghanap ka na ng ibang pagkakakitaan.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 9:49:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Stop using Bankard and RCBC cards. No wait, use them and max them out! Then default and tell them that your income is far less than the interest of their credit cards. How can they expect your income to keep up when inflation increased due to changing monetary policies of the government? After all, no investment outlet could have kept up! Then offer NAPOCOR bonds as payment!

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 9:53:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What is the point of all this I-am-better-than-thou display of "investment-savvy" -- after the fact? I think this has been conceded long time ago! This 'unlearned' poor plan holder's unhappy predicament is how to get Pacific Plans Inc to pay out on a legitimate and valid contract entered into 18 years ago!

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 10:01:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Their problem is how to :

1. Weasel out of the contracts they made with us.
2. Make it look like it is being
done with good intentions.
3. Make us look like the bad guys.
4. Keep their other businesses intact.
5. Come out of this with their name unscathed and untarnished.

Notice that the above is numbered according to difficulty.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 10:08:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Treasury bonds at 2,5,7 years"


2 Year Treasury Bonds (Rate is last transaction of year)

Before Tax
1994 - 13.25
1995 - 13.75
1996 - 12.82
1997 - 18.79
1998 - 15.00
1999 - 12.46
2000 - 15.51
2001 - 12.67
2002 - 8.62
2003 - 8.63
2004 - 10.6
2005 - 8.6

Average 12.55
-----
After Tax
1994 - 10.6
1995 - 11
1996 - 10.25
1997 - 15.03
1998 - 12
1999 - 9.96
2000 - 12.40
2001 - 10.13
2002 - 6.89
2003 - 6.90
2004 - 8.48
2005 - 6.88

Average 10.04

----

5 Year Treasury Bonds (Rate is last transaction of year)

Before Tax
1995 - 15.52
1996 - 14.42
1997 - 12.73
1998 - 15.97
1999 - 13.96
2000 - 16.55
2001 - 14.04
2002 - 10.70
2003 - 10.01
2004 - 12.45
2005 - 11.41

Average 13.43

After Tax
1995 - 12.41
1996 - 11.52
1997 - 10.18
1998 - 12.77
1999 - 11.16
2000 - 13.24
2001 - 11.23
2002 - 8.56
2003 - 8.00
2004 - 9.96
2005 - 9.12

Average 10.74


7 Year Treasury Bonds (Rate is last transaction of year)

Before Tax

1996 - 15.69
1997 - 19.88
1998 - 18.00
1999 - 14.37
2000 - 17.09
2001 - 15.59
2002 -
2003 - 11.31
2004 - 12.86
2005 - 11.45

Average 15.13

After Tax

1996 - 12.55
1997 - 15.90
1998 - 14.4
1999 - 11.49
2000 - 13.67
2001 - 12.47
2002 -
2003 - 9.04
2004 - 10.28
2005 - 9.16


Average 12.11


Even the long term bonds (7 year Treasury bonds) cant cope with tuition fee increases. BTW, 10 year bonds have only slighty higher yields than 7 year bonds.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 10:10:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Even the long term bonds (7 year Treasury bonds) cant cope with tuition fee increases."

So What? This excuses you from not fulfilling your contract and not doing your job? You can now renege and commit fraud? I don't think so!

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 10:27:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The reason why I posted above is to look and answer arguments rather than just plain emotions.

Remember the stand of PPI is in section XV.

"XV. FORTUITOUS EVENTS/IMPOSSIBILITY
PLANHOLDER AGREES THAT PACIFIC SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY INCONVENIENCE, LOSS, DAMAGE OR DELAY THAT MAY BE SUSTAINED BY THE PLANHOLDER AND/OR SCHOLAR RESULTING FROM FIRE, EARTHQUAKE, WAR OR CIVIL DISTURBANCES, EXTRAORDINARY ECONOMIC UPHEAVAL, STRIKES OR ANY LABOR DISPUTES, ACTS OF GOD, GOVERNMENT LEGISLATION OR REGULATION, OR SUCH OTHER MATTER OR CONDITIONS THAT ARE BEYOND THE CONTROL OF PACIFIC IN CONNECTION WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ITS OBLIGATION UNDER THIS AGREEMENT. PACIFIC HOWEVER, AGREES TO PAY TO PLANHOLDER UPON WRITTEN REQUEST THE PLAN TERMINATION VALUE STATED IN SECTION XIII. "

Take note on the heading is titled "Impossibility". If Coalition cannot show an investment vehicle that copes with tuition fees, then PPI is right, the whole contract is now "Impossible" to fullfill.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 10:28:00 AM, Blogger SunTzu said...

Ok Mr. BowWow thank you for cutting and pasting.

Now obviously you dont know what you are talking about because you took a simple average of all the
the 5 and 7yrs bills.

Second, you took the last transaction for the year for these rates. Heck in 1997 2nd half alone, rates were skyrocketing past the 25% range range if not more, for these bills. As an investment manager you buy on these blips.

So put your stinking no sense data away and go get more dog meat coz you have a lot more BS than you can handle. Shooo shooo....

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 10:40:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

So I suppose payment of management fees, dividends, transfer of assets, expenses, etc. all fall under "conditions that are beyond control of Pacific." Or are these "fortuitous events?" Pare ko, kahit ano sabihin mo - wala pa rin kayong transparency! Bukas ninyo libro ninyo rather than all these data.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 10:41:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Talking of taxes, what amount of taxes have these yuchengcos and their companies paid? Any guys from BIR in the coalition? It would be interesting to find out if these fraudsters have been paying the correct taxes. I read somewhere about a discrepancy between what they declared to the SEC and the BIR with regard to the Trust fund,was it? Would not be surprised if they defrauded the BIR too.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 10:44:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In response to:

"Second, you took the last transaction for the year for these rates. Heck in 1997 2nd half alone, rates were skyrocketing past the 25% range range if not more, for these bills. As an investment manager you buy on these blips."

Here all the 5-yr treasury bond auctions from 95-99. Where are the supposed blips?

5-23 19.Oct.99 14.130
5-22 27.Jul.99 13.528
5-21 23.Mar.99 13.925
5-20 15.Dec.98 15.975
5-19 22.Sep.98 19.673
5-18 23.Jun.98 20.745
5-17 24.Mar.98 19.647
5-16 17.Jun.97 12.736
5-15 25.Feb.97 12.411
5-14 19.Nov.96 14.423
5-13 27.Aug.96 14.927
5-12 26.Jun.96 15.510
5-11 23.Apr.96 15.100
5-10 19.Mar.96 15.248
5-9 20.Feb.96 14.841
5-8 30.Jan.96 15.066
5-7 19.Dec.95 15.525

Here all the 7-yr treasury bond auctions from 95-99. Where are the supposed blips?

7-19 14.Dec.99 14.378
7-18 16.Nov.99 14.541
7-17 05.Oct.99 14.622
7-16 14.Sep.99 14.912
7-15 24.Aug.99 14.000
7-14 27.Apr.99 13.817
7-13 26.Jan.99 16.348
7-12 27.Oct.98 18.008
7-11 28.Jul.98 19.983
7-10 28.Apr.98 19.590
7-9 28.Oct.97 19.888
7-8 18.Mar.97 12.374
7-7 17.Dec.96 13.784
7-6 22.Oct.96 14.751
7-5 23.Jul.96 15.517
7-4 28.May.96 15.718
7-3 26.Mar.96 15.663
7-2 27.Feb.96 15.588
7-1 23.Jan.96 15.700

All my posts are based on facts not presumptions.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 10:44:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"If Coalition cannot show an investment vehicle that copes with tuition fees, then PPI is right, the whole contract is now "Impossible" to fullfill."

- I beg to differ. This alone does not make the contract "impossible to fulfill." What makes it impossible to fulfill is the absence of cash/assets to pay planholders. Why is there an absence? Open your books and let's find out!

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 10:56:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In response to:

"I beg to differ. This alone does not make the contract "impossible to fulfill." What makes it impossible to fulfill is the absence of cash/assets to pay planholders."

The impossibility here is the payment of full tuition fees.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 11:07:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey look, Fido, this section XV argument has already been debunked. Looks like you came in late. Laos na yang section XV na yan. Estopped na ang PPI sa paginvoke nyan. so shoo. stop wasting our time here,Fido. shoo.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 11:45:00 AM, Anonymous kit said...

In response to: (from a different thread in this website, but since this is the latest one, I will answer it here)



"To Kit,

I commiserate with your situation, although I do not know if you will feel the same with mine. I have two availing trad plans and one non-availing trad plan with Pacific, plus two fixed value plans transferred to Lifetime. I am in all three camps at the same time. The convolutions in this drama have made me feel like I don't know if I am coming or going.

I am willing to grant that the issue of fund mismanagement is one that is wide open to interpretation. Both sides would be able present reams and reams of data, all of which are history but, at the end of the day, is just that, history.

What is more important to me, and I am sure also to most planholders caught in this mess, is: what do we do to move forward from here?

That "here" has changed dramatically since this whole fiasco blew up in our faces on April 14. Let me retrace the steps for you.

First, PPI unleashed their rehab plan, without notice to any planholder. Then they dropped the bomb on us, with their letter about their rehab plan and their "tuition support" for less than the guaranteed amount.

I, for one, bit the bullet like never before and hoped and prayed for the best. Within a week of that bomb, news of the PEP Coalition forming came and created a wave of support from me and others like me.

Days of frenzied press releases from both camps ensued, resulting finally in the old man AY himself coming out with his P250 million. So, the "here" of April 14 moved forward to some relief for guys like me.

In the midst of the release of this second tranche, the SEC revoked Lifetime's incorporation. In apparent retaliation, PPI suspended the second tranche, and from what I have read elsewhere, even payments from the first tranche. Now, the "here" is where? It looks like limbo for everyone, at the moment.

As an earlier blogger commented, the coalition has been trying to begin negotiations with the people at PPI who have brought this all about. Up to today, those efforts have been rebuffed. And rebuffed with a vengeance! No way will they come to any negotiating table! From all indications, not now and not ever!

Now, tell me. How do we move forward from this particular "here" if the other party, who started this whole fiasco, does not even want to talk to the parties they should have consulted with in the first place, we the planholders of both PPI and LPI? Nover mind all these discussions about fund management and ARLs and spin-off and whatever. Please let me know if you have any ideas how we, all planholders of either trad or fixed value, can get this monster of a company to talk to us in a decent manner. Let's not get caught in any argument over anything else. How do we all move forward from this "here"? I am dying to hear your ideas."

----------------------------------
The only way to move forward in my opinion, for the benefit of all planholders whether traditional availing,fixed,traditional non-availing) is to elect representatives from each of thess sectors of planholders who are willing to discuss and negotiate with PPI. Piccio does not look like the negotiating type and is in fact happier if no negotiations are ongoing. Publicity is his key to his political aspirations. Also, who would want to negotiate with someone who just likes to "grandstand"?

If SEC turns down the appeal of LPI to revoke the Certificate of Incorporation of Lifetime Plans, the fixed value planholders,like me, will organize ourselves and protect our own interests. This will become one big mess! We are 400,000 compared to 32,000. Any of your plans that will affect or delay the release of any our money will be stricken down by the fixed value planholders.

I believe above is the only way for all of us to move forward.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 11:45:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I dont know much about investment stategy, fs, arl or trust funds. I only know that the yuchengots hurt my family financially and emotionally, that they're making things difficult for us to get what is due to us. Let's return the favor by not patronizing their money-making corporations. This is the only way to pressure them to honor their obligations. BOYCOTT THE YUCHENGOTS YGC CORPORATIONS.
The coalition should be wary of associating themselves with any politicians, most especially the old ones. They could not be TRUSTED JUST LIKE THE YUCHENGOTS. The politicians are the lowest creatures in our country. They're the armpit of this society. Starting from the president down to the councillors, I believe they're all corrupt. Why??? Well, who would invest/spent millions and millions of money for their campaign, only to get a position that would earn them hundred of thousands a year? They will surely resort to corruption to get their roi. Have you ever heard of a politician going bankrupt? Sadly, Filipinos have a short term memory. As can be expected, they will elect the same corrupt officials come election time.
I have little expectations on the legal battle being wage by the coalition against the yuchengots. The yuchengots can wait/ delay the legal proceedings for at least 10 years before a final decision can be made. I cannot wait that long. If i have nothing in life, with nothing to hope for, I will surely join the NPA or the ABB and shoot those YUCHENGOTS and crooked politicians, or kidnap their siblings for ransom to pay for my daughter's tuition.
The coalition are always talking about PPI and lifetime. These are legal entities. Who are the people running these corporations, the ones responsible for the rehabilitation. Included, of course, is Mr. (pining) Garcia and Tecson(a), ang pangpahid sa kilikili. Para pagnakita ko ang mga tao na ito, masasabunutan ko lahat sila- sa ilong.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 11:56:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What other investments? What about credit card firms like Bankard that probably charge merchants 5% per month (or 60% per annum) + 2-3% per month to card holders who do not pay on time (or 24 - 36% per annum) + finance or late payment charges + annual fees?

What about Funeraria Paz which charges relatives of the deceased an arm and a leg and the poor relatives cannot haggle bec of the state of bereavement they're in and the notion that they shouldn't skimp on the final expense of their loved ones?

What about banks like RCBC charging 18 - 20% for loans(I believe it went as high as 36% in the good old days) while paying 1% for savings accts?

The list goes on. If we know all the kinds of investments and ROIs Yuchengco went into, and had the access to these investments, we wouldn't have bought Pacific plans anymore.

The point of cat danny is that ordinary mortals like us already had access to a simple investment that approximates (ok if you say it doesn't equal) the rise in tuition fees. But the gods like Yuchengco and their teams of analysts, investment experts, and so on, should naturally have more means, muscle, and information at their disposal to get higher returns.

This argument is just to debunk PPI's claim that there's no investment that could give the returns of tuition fees. It does not give PPI the right or the excuse not to live up to its promise.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 11:58:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"What about Funeraria Paz which charges relatives of the deceased an arm and a leg and the poor relatives cannot haggle bec of the state of bereavement they're in and the notion that they shouldn't skimp on the final expense of their loved ones?"

FYI. Funeraria Paz is partly owned by PRUDENTIALIFE.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 12:00:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"So What? This excuses you from not fulfilling your contract and not doing your job? You can now renege and commit fraud? I don't think so! "

WHERE'S THE FRAUD? A CONTRACT HAS MANY PROVISIONS. LOOK INTO ALL, NOT THE ONE WHICH BENEFITS YOU ONLY. TRY SECTION XV AND PRE-TERMINATION VALUES.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 12:01:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"FYI. Funeraria Paz is partly owned by PRUDENTIALIFE. "

So? We're not talking about prudentialife? Go to their blogsite.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 12:02:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"So I suppose payment of management fees, dividends, transfer of assets, expenses, etc. all fall under "conditions that are beyond control of Pacific." Or are these "fortuitous events?" Pare ko, kahit ano sabihin mo - wala pa rin kayong transparency! Bukas ninyo libro ninyo rather than all these data."

Bukas nman d ba. Kaya nyo nakukuha from your cohorts sa SEC. You only have to disprove it in court and to come out with generalities in press conferences and grandstandings.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 12:04:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"TRY SECTION XV AND PRE-TERMINATION VALUES. "

The pre-termination values only applies if the planholder terminates the contract, not the issuer. Don't muddle the issue and tell the planholders they're lucky they're getting more than the pre-termination values.

I don't think there's a contract out there that states I can get all your money and if I choose to terminate the contract, I'll only give you back half. Then, of course, it's always in my best interest to terminate and get 100% profit.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 12:23:00 PM, Anonymous KIT said...

I would just like to add that we,the fixed value planholders numbering 400,000, got plans with returns of about 9%-10% since we are happy with these returns.

You guys are crying foul because you are not getting your 15%-20% returns??!! And you expect the fixed value planholders to symphatize with you???!!

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 12:24:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Fido, are you deaf and blind? Sinabi na nga na laos na yang Section XV na yan kasi nga ngayon nyo lang ginagamit eh ang tagal na palang prublema yang tuition fee.
Oh well, i suppose you bowwows really are dense. Do i see your tail wagging? No, you get no bones from me. oh shoo, go away, shoo.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 12:37:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To kit,

So it's ok with you if you have an ROP bond with 11% interest now and upon maturity, they changed the rules and give you 1% interest only? After all, millions of savings account holders are happy with their 1% interest.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 12:48:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Madami pa sa mga ahente ko ang tatabangan.
Ang baba na ng benta namin."

E di magresign ka na kung ganyan reklamo at maghanap ka na ng ibang pagkakakitaan.

In response to the above na magresign na lang daw po ako.
Kita ninyo na po kung papaano mangatwiran ang mga taga PPI? Sinabi ko lang po na tinatabangan na ako. Pinag reresign na ako. Ako po ay madaming pinagkakakitaang iba, maliban sa PPI. Di po ako mawawalan ng kabuhayan.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 12:49:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

the point of the cat is that maliit na lang ang kulang in order to be able to satisfy all the planholders.

now the apologists want us to believe that there is no investment that can do that. teka teka..eh if the fund manager used their brains and invested in US or local stocks in the 1990s, then we would be doing fine. they should have WORKED for the 0.50% that they charge for managing our money.

to look only at T-bills is a non starter. eh kung ganun lang eh danny the cat is right, any idiot can do that. that is why i put my money in PPI to begin with. i have a day job and that means i don't have the time or skills to manage my own fund. wag nyo kaming gawing tanga! i know basic fund management from what i read in the papers. di ba you are supposed to give us a BALANCED PORTFOLIO? why is it filled with NAPOCOR bonds? labo ng argument nyo that there is no investment that can fill in the needs...admit it, RCBC TRUST DIDN'T DO THEIR JOB!!! THEY ARE JUST AS GUILTY AS PPI!!! they aided the fraud

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 12:53:00 PM, Anonymous vagabond said...

KIT said...

I would just like to add that we,the fixed value planholders numbering 400,000, got plans with returns of about 9%-10% since we are happy with these returns.

You guys are crying foul because you are not getting your 15%-20% returns??!! And you expect the fixed value planholders to symphatize with you???!!

Monday, June 06, 2005 12:23:38 PM


1. It is not the size of the return we are that we are crying foul about. Hell, the return could be 1-2%! We would not cry foul if THAT is what the contract said it should be. Our contract said they would pay whatever the cost would be at the time of availment so that is what we are asking for. Nothing more. And you would too if you were in our shoes. You are happy with your 9-10% because that is what is in your contract. But what if PPI says it will pay you only 3-4% because of whatever new excuse they choose to concoct? Would you honestly say that you would not cry foul? I bet you would too.
That is why we are fighting. To keep them honest. If we allow them to get away with reneging on their commitments, how sure are you that they will not renege on their commitments to YOU just as they did to us?
2. I read your piece about your idea of how to move forward. You want to take Philip out of the equation. Already we’re starting on the wrong foot here. FYI, Philip and the guys in the board of the Coalition were here from day 1 and they’ve worked their asses off trying to get PPI on the table to resolve this mess. PPI’s response has been to stonewall and do a media campaign to make itself look good while trying to vilify the Coalition and its leadership.
Do you know Philip at all or are your impressions of him based on what you’ve heard? How do you know that he is not the negotiating type? That he is happier that no negotiations are ongoing? You should try talking to the guy, then make your judgements of him. But as it is, you have thrown an obstacle to YOUR OWN suggested path to resolving this mess by imposing conditions.

And that makes me doubt your sincerity about moving forward from this “here”.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 12:58:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To Kit,

Can you give us the contact nbr of your employer? I'm sure they'll be happy to know you are willing to take a pay cut to minimum wage since a lot of people are on minimum wage, so that you can save your company some money and give your employers more bonuses and their stockholders, more dividends.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 1:19:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Magic of Lapsation Gains:
A Little Simulation to show how things work in the pre-need industry:

No. of clients 100
Contribution 500
Fund 50,000

Terminations 80.00
Per Client costs 250.00
Total Termination costs 20,000.00

Net Funds 30,000.00
Net Yield 15%
Average Yrs 15.00
Accumulation: 244,111.85

Remaining Clients 20
Per Client asset share 12,205.59

Geometric Return 23.74%

Here, using the 15% net return being used by PPI, lapsation gains can drive up the returns to almost 24% yield on the asset share per persisting plan. This simple simulation goes to show that returns can be boosted up by incorporating the actual business model of Pacific Plans.

By the way, based on the PPI Actuarial Valuation Reports, even the fixed-value plans were being valued at 15% net return. This means that PPI systematically under-valued its Liabilities to all planholders, whether fixed-value or open-ended. Problem is that they dissipated the assets through high General Admin. Expenses and Commissions, plus fantastic dividend payouts. With no assets to back up the liabilities, they either cough up with infusions... or set in motion their actuations that have caught the ire of the regulators and the planholders.

Pacific Plans did not go the the courts with clean hands. They violated the contract, and must pay!

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 1:27:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The impossibility here is the payment of full tuition fees."

Kasi nga ninakaw ang pera ng PPI! (Hihirit ka nanaman ba ng ninakaw? saan pumunta? Ang di makakita nito either bulag, bayad, o tanga!) At the end of the day, you did not keep your promise and you trasnferred assets out of PPI to keep it out of reach of the planholders. And you left NAPOCOR bonds with PPI. Of course, that makes it "impossible to fulfill the contract."

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 1:36:00 PM, Anonymous KIT said...

In response to:

"Do you know Philip at all or are your impressions of him based on what you’ve heard? How do you know that he is not the negotiating type? That he is happier that no negotiations are ongoing? You should try talking to the guy, then make your judgements of him. But as it is, you have thrown an obstacle to YOUR OWN suggested path to resolving this mess by imposing conditions. "

If the coaltion is more for giving "brownie points" to its leaders than to the welfare of its members, then go ahead with your current path. Maybe you are Piccio? It is not a condition but it is the only sound way to move forward.

At the end, the majority's (400,000) welfare will take precedence over the minority(32,000). I was only trying to give coalition an option. It has been 2 months already and nothing much has happened. With your current course, wait at least 15 years.

BTW, even if PPI decided not to investment in Napacor bonds and decided to go with T-bonds or ROP, the whole problem remains, you wont get your whole tuition. You guys are not tackling the issues but creating your own smoke and mirrors.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 1:39:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"even if PPI decided not to investment in Napacor bonds and decided to go with T-bonds or ROP, the whole problem remains, you wont get your whole tuition."

Of course, because the real problem is that the yuchengcos don't want to pay! Plain and simple! And they will do everything in their power, including commit fraud, so as not to pay a contract where they will lose!

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 1:56:00 PM, Anonymous KIT said...

In response to:

"The Magic of Lapsation Gains:
A Little Simulation to show how things work in the pre-need industry:

No. of clients 100
Contribution 500
Fund 50,000

Terminations 80.00
Per Client costs 250.00
Total Termination costs 20,000.00

Net Funds 30,000.00
Net Yield 15%
Average Yrs 15.00
Accumulation: 244,111.85

Remaining Clients 20
Per Client asset share 12,205.59

Geometric Return 23.74%"

This model may be accurate if PPI continuous to sell traditional plans. Terminations look too high though.

The problem with the argument above is that PPI stopped selling traditional plans since 1992. Lapsations/Terminations are normally are on the first to second year of the term of the planholder. Would you stop paying a plan after you paid more than 2 years? No way. So, PPI cannot invest the funds from lapsations since there will be hardly any lapsations since mid 1990s.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 1:59:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"At the end, the majority's (400,000) welfare will take precedence over the minority(32,000). "

Don't be so arrogant as to think you are the only one working for everybody's welfare. As we have shown here, even the fixed-value plans are in danger so if PPI is allowed to run roughshod over everybody who opposes its will and wins, it's only a matter of time before they turn their attention to the undervaluation of liabilities of the fixed-value plans. And yes, I accuse PPI of undervaluing the fixed-value plans, since it is still using 15% net when it has already been shown in this blog that 15% is clearly an untenable rate.

"You guys are not tackling the issues but creating your own smoke and mirrors."

Funny you should say that because that's what I accuse you of, kit.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 2:04:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The problem with the argument above is that PPI stopped selling traditional plans since 1992. Lapsations/Terminations are normally are on the first to second year of the term of the planholder. Would you stop paying a plan after you paid more than 2 years? No way. So, PPI cannot invest the funds from lapsations since there will be hardly any lapsations since mid 1990s."

That's where you are wrong, kit. I suggest you try going over the Actuarial Valuation Report for 2003 of PPI. You clearly do not know what you are talking about. And by the way, even the fixed-value plans use lapsation assumptions. Try to take a look at the PPI numbers and see how much of the cohort is left at maturity, especially for fixed-vale plans.

That destroys your credibility to me, kit.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 2:14:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Pinag reresign na ako. Ako po ay madaming pinagkakakitaang iba, maliban sa PPI. Di po ako mawawalan ng kabuhayan."

You're contradicting yourself. Maraming pinagkakakitaan pero ayaw bumitaw. Saka ikaw na lang ata ahente ng PPI ah.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 2:20:00 PM, Anonymous KIT said...

In response to:

"I suggest you try going over the Actuarial Valuation Report for 2003 of PPI."

Unlike you guys, all I have is public information. Where can I have a hold of this?

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 3:15:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What have we accomplished the last two months
1. Identified YUCHENCGO as a FRAUDSTER and not as Mr. Integrity.
2. Popularized 'yuchengcoed' as alternative term for victim of fraud.
3. Have caused PPI to pay the college tuition fee of our children for first semester of school year or the full year tuition cost for elem and HS.
4. SEC revoked license of LIFETIME plans.
5. PEP Coalition has educated and moved to action and sharing a lot of people.
6. This blog has become instrumental for mental discourse.
7. May naging makata at may nagpakilala kung ano ang pagkatao and so on...

Long Live PEP Coalition!!
No to Rehab!!!!
Jail the criminals !!!

See you at the Senate Hearing on Tuesday.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 3:39:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"So, PPI cannot invest the funds from lapsations since there will be hardly any lapsations since mid 1990s."

I'm getting a strong feeling kit is not who he wants us to think he is.

Anyway, there is / was no separation between trad and fixed plans before. I believe fixed plans evolved from trad plans or is a limited form of the original trad plan, so the lapsations of subsequent plans still applies to the model presented.

Even if they had separated the two trust funds, PPI can apply whatever profits they took as dividends from the fixed plan to cover their exposure in the trad plans. Instead, they happily took out the profits and left trad plans to die. If they're able to get away with it, they can do it to all their remaining plans, fixed or not.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 3:51:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Juday at Ryan Agoncillo, sweet na sweet sa Gawad Urian!

Gawad Urian, gabi ni Cesar Montano!

Jojo Gabinete

GABI ni Cesar Montano ang 28th Gawad Urian dahil humakot ng karangalan ang Panaghoy sa Suba, ang pelikula na kanyang pinagbidahan. Si Cesar din ang producer at direktor ng best picture ng mga miyembro ng mga Manunuri ng Pelikulang Pilipino. Kahati ng Pangahoy sa Suba sa best picture award ang Ebolusyon ng Pamilyang Pilipino, ang independent film na pinamahalaan ni Lav Diaz.

Urian best actor si Cesar at best actress si Judy Ann Santos para sa Sabel. Best supporting actress si Iza Calzado (Sigaw) at ibinigay naman ng MPP kay Wendell Ramos ang best supporting actor trophy (Sabel). Ito ang kauna-unahang acting award ni Wendell.

Natuwa kami kay Angie Reyes. Siya ang tumanggap ng best sound award para sa Panaghoy sa Suba. Dahil sa matinding kaligayahan, parang bata na napaiyak si Angie.

Nagustuhan namin ang tribute ni Cesar at ng Loboc Children’s Choir sa mga dating child actress na kinikilala ngayon bilang mahuhusay na aktres, sina Lorna Tolentino, Gina Alajar, Snooky Serna at Judy Ann.

Sayang, hindi available sina Vilma Santos at Maricel Soriano para maging bahagi ng magandang tribute.

Sina Phillip Salvador at Gina Alajar ang mga presenter ng best picture category.

Maaliwalas na ang itsura ni Phillip at bumalik na ang kanyang movie star aura at confidence na tila nawala noong kainitan ng legal battle nila ng ex-girlfriend na si Tina Decena.

Siyanga pala, kapansin-pansin ang pagiging sweet nina Juday at Ryan Agoncillo sa Gawad Urian, ha.

***

Ginanap sa AFP Theater sa Camp Aguinaldo ang 28th Gawad Urian. Na-delay ng kalahating oras ang airing sa RPN 9 ng awards night na loaded ng maraming commercials.

Ikinuwento sa amin ni Gorgy Rula na invited si Albert Martinez para mag-present ng award dahil past winner siya ng Urian, pero hindi nakarating ang aktor dahil sa malakas na pagbuhos ng ulan.

Inabot ng baha si Albert sa Katipunan area kaya kinailangang i-tow ang kanyang sasakyan. Umalis kaagad sa AFP Theater ang isang aktor nang matunugan nito na hindi siya mananalo ng award. Naniniwala kami na umasa ang aktor dahil sunud-sunod na ang acting trophy na kanyang natanggap.

Bukod sa Panaghoy sa Suba, humakot din ng award ang Ebolusyon ng Pamilyang Pilipino. Lalo kaming nagkaroon ng interes na mapanood ang pelikula ni Lav Diaz.

Hindi namin kailangan na maging manghuhula para malaman ang choice of winners ng MPP. Kung sino ang nominated at present sa Gawad Urian, tiyak na sila ang mananalo.

***

Mabilis ang sagot ni Pretty Pinay sa Abante on-line reader na nagreklamo na sinisingil siya ng US$1 ng mga organizer ng Return of the Champions para magkaroon ng autograph nina Christian Bautista at Rachel Ann Go.

Ito ang unedited email ni Pretty Pinay:

Gusto ko lang mag-comment about sa article na sinulat mo kahapon about "The Champions". Mali ang info na ibinigay niya. Hindi sila nagpapabayad ng autograph nila, but ‘yung $1.00 na sinasabi niya is kung gusto mo bumili ng picture nila na kung gusto mong papirmahan then lapitan mo sila and pa-autograph ka. Autographed picture bale. Basically if you don’t want to pay $1.00, fine. Don’t buy the picture pero that doesn’t mean na hindi na sila magpapa-autograph. Kung may dala kang picture nila go ahead, pa-autograph ka nang walang bayad.

***

Sina Boy2 Quizon at Marissa Sanchez ang mga guest bukas sa Bahay Mo Ba ‘To. Si Boy2 si Carey at si Marissa si Terry. Buwan na ng pasukan at walang tigil na nagtatalo sina Baby at Nene (Tessie Tomas at Ronaldo Valdez, respectively), kung sino sa kanila ang dapat bumili ng mga school materials ng mga apo nila.

Kasama si Dorothy (Sunshine Dizon), namili si Baby ng mamahaling gamit nina Julius at Junabeth sa isang mall samantalang namakyaw at nambarat ng mga gamit sa baratillo si Nene.

Si Terry ang terror teacher nina Junabeth at Julius. Masungit at praning si Terry dahil matagal na niyang hindi nakikita ang kapatid na si Carey. Ang Bahay Mo Ba’To ay napapanood tuwing Martes sa GMA 7, 10:30 pm.

***

Comments are welcome at jojogabinete@ yahoo. com.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 4:09:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow, Fido got irritated and left his S**t here. Tells you a lot about what takes up his time if he is not busy sniffing around in this blog. Go away, Fido, and don't leave your S**t here. Shoo, shoo.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 4:30:00 PM, Anonymous vagabond said...

Sorry kit, I am not Philip, and i was not giving brownie points to our leaders, merely giving credit to those who deserve it.

Precisely the welfare of the members (and the public in general including you fixed income planholders) can be best served by pressuring the Yuchengcos to live up to the contract they signed or be penalized heavily for for not doing so.

That end can not be served if we allow them to get away with what they are trying to pull now. It certainly can not be served if we fight with each other rather than alongside each other against the leviathan that is the Yuchengco group. Rather than casting doubts on Philip or the Coalition, your end of protecting your investments in what was once Pacific Plans would be better served if you train your guns at PPI/Yuchengco. We have all seen what pressure from "a few noisy planholders" can do. AY was forced to come up with that 250M loan.
What more if the "few" turns out to be more than they bargained for? The Coalition is not the enemy of the fixed planholders. Although PPI/Yuchengco wants them to think that way so all planholders remain divided. They have been trying to do this from day 1. And you, my friend, are falling into their trap.

Unless of course, you are not what you say you are.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 4:48:00 PM, Anonymous vagabond said...

BTW Kit,

You never replied to the first part of my post. Would you quietly accept and not object at all if they suddenly changed the terms of your contract?

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 5:11:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

question lang:

for all the products that are being offered to you especially by sales agents, dont' you purchase these because of the agent.

Kasi sa mga nagsasabing kaya nila binili ang mga plano nila is because of the YGC, iilan lang yun. Kaya natin binili ang mga plano ay dahil sa mga ahente, na kundi natin kapamilya ay kapuso, kaibigan o kakilala.

Gaya ng ibang planholders ng ibang kumpanya, bumili sila hindi dahil kina Sobrepena o Colayco o Alba o kahit sinong demonyo dyan kundi dahil sa mga ahenteng nagalok sa kanila.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 5:11:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

question lang:

for all the products that are being offered to you especially by sales agents, dont' you purchase these because of the agent.

Kasi sa mga nagsasabing kaya nila binili ang mga plano nila is because of the YGC, iilan lang yun. Kaya natin binili ang mga plano ay dahil sa mga ahente, na kundi natin kapamilya ay kapuso, kaibigan o kakilala.

Gaya ng ibang planholders ng ibang kumpanya, bumili sila hindi dahil kina Sobrepena o Colayco o Alba o kahit sinong demonyo dyan kundi dahil sa mga ahenteng nagalok sa kanila.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 5:15:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"FYI. Funeraria Paz is partly owned by PRUDENTIALIFE. "

So? We're not talking about prudentialife? Go to their blogsite. "

Ay tanga! Kaya sinabi yun is because of their partnership with Pacific sa Funeraria Paz, all actions should be equally made against them. Kung meron man!

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 5:21:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ganito na lang, kuha tayo ng isang P27,000 na exclusive na plano nun, to mature in 15 years.

Sa 27K na yan, may 25% ang pupunta sa operating expenses so ang net nyan could be 20+K.

This 20+K when availed for the first year sa isang exclu school is P100K. Assuming walang increase in 4 years, that would be 400K.

Anong investment instrument ang makakagawang ang 20+K mo ang magiging 400K in 15 years?

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 5:37:00 PM, Anonymous mjc said...

"Anonymous said...
What have we accomplished the last two months
1. Identified YUCHENCGO as a FRAUDSTER and not as Mr. Integrity.
- Ha? Eh kayo lang nagsasabi nyan thru your grandstanding bereft of facts and purely inventions.

2. Popularized 'yuchengcoed' as alternative term for victim of fraud.
- Ha? Eh sa inyo lang nman yan eh. what about Philip Freakshow?

3. Have caused PPI to pay the college tuition fee of our children for first semester of school year or the full year tuition cost for elem and HS.
- Aba! Ang galing nyo talaga. Teka, pati ba yung malalakas na paguulan nitong mga nagdaang araw eh inaako nyo na rin?

4. SEC revoked license of LIFETIME plans.
- To the detriment of 400K fixed value planholders na inosente. Shotgun approach to solving problems, sige ng sige kahit sino madamay.

5. PEP Coalition has educated and moved to action and sharing a lot of people.
- Educated? Remains to be seen. Asan ang court suit nyo? A lot of people? Eh bakit humihingi kayo suporta sa ibang grupo? Kasi, iilan lang kayo.

6. This blog has become
instrumental for mental discourse.
- Tama! Pang mental hospital talaga kayo.

7. May naging makata at may nagpakilala kung ano ang pagkatao and so on...
- altenative source of livelihood on top of being clowns of the coalition.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 6:00:00 PM, Anonymous KIT said...

In response to:


"It is not the size of the return we are that we are crying foul about. Hell, the return could be 1-2%! We would not cry foul if THAT is what the contract said it should be. Our contract said they would pay whatever the cost would be at the time of availment so that is what we are asking for. Nothing more. And you would too if you were in our shoes. You are happy with your 9-10% because that is what is in your contract. But what if PPI says it will pay you only 3-4% because of whatever new excuse they choose to concoct? Would you honestly say that you would not cry foul? I bet you would too."

If interest rates become 1-2%, I won't cry foul. In other words, if what is being offered to me is reasonable, I won't cry foul even if i don't get the whole amount. I have my own business. If my supplies increase in price, I have to increase my prices. If not, I have to stop selling this product or in the worst case, close the company.

"Precisely the welfare of the members (and the public in general including you fixed income planholders) can be best served by pressuring the Yuchengcos to live up to the contract they signed or be penalized heavily for for not doing so."

Do you honestly believe that you made headway with your pressure tactics these past 2 months? I don't think so.

I also don't get your logic, if you pressure the bank and other companies, then you will get paid? I am sure other people, with different motives, are riding on your actions. Whatever the case, if your tactics were to work, it should have worked by now.

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 8:12:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the poster below and Kit

Take note on the heading is titled "Impossibility". If Coalition cannot show an investment vehicle that copes with tuition fees, then PPI is right, the whole contract is now "Impossible" to fullfill.



If I insure my car with Malayan for 500,000 with a premium of lets say 20,000 does that mean Malayan has every right not to pay me in case my car gets carnap for the simple reason that no such investment can earn that much? What kind of reasoning is this.

The table you publish shows a return of more or less about 12% net of interest for 7 year investment from the year 1995 to 2004. Now, please explain to me how can Lifetime cope up with the payment for the pension plan of my wife which she bought in 1995 with maturity in 10 years. She was to pay more or less 50,000 evenly spread in 5 years with a face value of 100.000 at the end of the 10th year. Tell me how can they earn that much using your table as their investment guide? Remember, the first 2 years of my wife premium which is about 20,000 shall more or less go to the payment of commission, overhead , taxes, etc. It is only in the 3rd year that a big part of it goes to its investable fund. How can you make 100,000 with only 30,000 as investment in a little over 5 years using your table?

If you are for real, with these revelation how sure are you Lifetime will not use the same impossibility rule when your plan matures?

 
At Monday, June 06, 2005 8:49:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To Kit

If interest rates become 1-2%, I won't cry foul. In other words, if what is being offered to me is reasonable, I won't cry foul even if i don't get the whole amount. I have my own business. If my supplies increase in price, I have to increase my prices. If not, I have to stop selling this product or in the worst case, close the company.

Easily said than done. Judging by what you said you seem to be a moneyed person so it won’t bother you at all. But what about the others. What if you work your heart out in Saudi just to buy an education plan for your children then retire believing that the future of your children’s education is secured then something like this happens how would you feel? Most of us work hard for the future of our kids and could hardly make both ends meet with the present state of our nation. You may believe this may be an exageration but why don’t you look at the declining number of children enrolling in private schools. Since the late 90’s it has been declining. Before good schools were not affected at all but even now a school here located in the Alabang area wherein in the past has a waiting list is now also complaining of a big reduction of this school years enrollment. People are hard up and they are relying in the promise that no matte what the cost is you are assured of an education for your son.

 
At Tuesday, June 07, 2005 12:04:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here's a good investment strategy:

Buy Mapua Institute of Technology at PhP980M in 1999. Dump the old RCBC building in Buendia into MIT's balance sheet at PhP1B considering its just salvage value left in RCBC balance sheet. can you imagine that 3-storey 20year old building at PhP1B while spunking new RCBC Plaza with two 40-storey towers and multi-level basement parking (state-of-the-art at that) cost US$340M (roughly PhP17B)

Now how much did the PhP980M investment returned? in 2002, it made income of close to PhP300M. In 2003, MIT made the Yuchengco PhP367M out of revenue of PhP1.4B. And remember schools pay only 10% income tax not to mention students doing OJT were working for free Yuchengco projects like edsamail and eCasino.

Now you only have to project the financial trend and you will arrive at an investment like no other (not even the telcos were getting that rate of return doing public service business like a school) except that the Yuchengcos kept it for themselves and bought NAPOCOR bonds for PPI trad plans instead.

 
At Tuesday, June 07, 2005 10:16:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

REMINDER TO: ALL PEP COALITION MEMBERS

See you and your scholars at the SENATE LOBBY, Senate of the Phils. {at the back of GSIS}, Reclamation Area, Roxas Blvd., Pasay City, Metro Manila.
before 2pm today, June 7, 2005.

Wear white or black shirt.

Let us UNITE for the SAKE OF OUR CHILDREN!

 
At Tuesday, June 07, 2005 11:08:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Answer the issue: specifically state the investment vehicle net of all taxes that copes with tuition fee hike. Or is it back to your smoke and mirrors diversionary tactics since you know you are wrong. This is my dare to you that will not be challenged"

Is there? If there is none, ou mean they they used "tuition fee hike" as their investment bait?

 
At Tuesday, June 07, 2005 11:13:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The impossibility here is the payment of full tuition fees."

ppi doesn't pay the full tuition, but standard fees only. Not all tuition fee increases are covered by ppi.

 
At Tuesday, June 07, 2005 12:47:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Answer the issue: specifically state the investment vehicle net of all taxes that copes with tuition fee hike. Or is it back to your smoke and mirrors diversionary tactics since you know you are wrong. This is my dare to you that will not be challenged"

Were there not several posts about other investment vehicles net of taxes that could cope with tuition fee hike e.g. Mapua, RCBC Bankard, RCBC loans, Funeraria Paz, etc.?

 
At Tuesday, June 07, 2005 2:58:00 PM, Anonymous KIT said...

Were there not several posts about other investment vehicles net of taxes that could cope with tuition fee hike e.g. Mapua, RCBC Bankard, RCBC loans, Funeraria Paz, etc.?

Are you serious???! or just ignorant. These are not investment vehicles:

Let us go through your list one by one:


1) Mapua - Mapua is owned by iPeople,inc., which is a publicly listed company. These means that any tom,dick,or harry, may have a stake in this company. This means you cannot dispose of any assets of this company to subsidize another. Imagine thousands and thousands of non yuchengco investors protecting their rights. Also, If your plan is to invest in a company, there is no guarantee of returns. The safest investment is where returns are assurred.

2) Bankard - Rates you mentioned are for late penalties. You mean you will encourage all credit card customers to delay payment and the profit from these late penalties will be used to subsidize trust fund. Also, bankard is again another publicly listed company.

3) Loans - The lower the rates the better for you. You got it all opposite. This means that you should look for loans that are so low that PPI can borrow and invest in the trust funds or real investment vehicles with higher returns. Basically, you make money with the spread.

4) Funeraria Paz - This is something wherein I totally dont understand your logic. you want PPI to invest in Funeraria Paz and hope that more people die so you can get your tuition money. If for instance, Funeraria Paz, makes 10K for every death, you want 300,000 people to die and use Funeraria Paz. Also, as mentioned by another poster, there is another investor in Funeraria Paz who owns 50%. This means that 600,000 people must die to cover your tuition money. You guys are sick!!!!

 
At Tuesday, June 07, 2005 11:07:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

if you really wanted to win the argument so badly why don't you just say so rather than post lengthy pretending-to-be-intelligent discussion that does not hit the mark.

ipeople might be publicly listed but read again, it is basically wholly owned by Yuchengco. oh puhlease, you even show concern for the minority shareholders when the whole board of trustees are yuchengco appointed (and almost identical to PPI) and they did not even show concern for stakeholders (students, alumni, parents) when they raised tuition, implemented quarterm system and then changed the name to Malayan colleges without regard for the legacy that school and its alumni contributed to this country.

and the fact that ipeople is publicly listed means it is a valid investment vehicle.

AGAIN:
We've just shown you exactly how PPI could earn enough to pay for its obligation by investing in the right business and instruments! don't even try to squirm out of that argument.

And go to yuchengco sites and READ again because they even claim that MIT pulled HI (House of investments) out of the red! One single holding that is MIT pulled the whole holding company out of the red!

MIT's 2003 net was PhP367M while ipeople netted PhP700M. Net, okay, net?! understand?

Funeraria Paz: they're already doing great business and if PPI had invested in it, again, it would obviously be a better investment than NAPOCOR bonds. geez, where is it in the argument that says more people have to die?! And Furneraria Paz sucat is wholly yuchengco owned.

RCBC loan: are you kidding me? why would lower loan interest be good for PPI? that will be a really dumb proposition for PPI (now bankrupt and mired in debt) to further borrow. What the argument is (and reread it if you cant find the logic which you kept on repeating), if PPI had invested instead on RCBC shares instead which means higher loan interest is good because if you are a shareholder, higher loan interest will provide more revenue hence more profit hence more return to PPI than the NAPOCOR bonds they've invested in but since they did not, oh well, thats what happened.

yes we are serious. no, you are the stupid one and you are right, you can't find the logic - not because there is none but because, well, you can't find it.

Grabe, magkano na naipon sa pagpopost mo dito. tyaga mo talaga. magpalit ka naman ng nick every now and then para kunyari marami kayo.

 
At Wednesday, June 08, 2005 12:08:00 PM, Blogger SunTzu said...

To Mr. BowWow you still have not
addressed the issue. The investment manager and the PPI management should have taken adv. of 20% interest rates

Dont you see the blips ?
Its all there, the 19+% in 98 and so on. So why did RCBC Trust and PPI not take adv. of that? Tell me did all schools tuition increase by 20% every year?

Answer the question, you just give data and your full of it!

 
At Wednesday, June 08, 2005 7:42:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"question lang:

for all the products that are being offered to you especially by sales agents, dont' you purchase these because of the agent.

Kasi sa mga nagsasabing kaya nila binili ang mga plano nila is because of the YGC, iilan lang yun. Kaya natin binili ang mga plano ay dahil sa mga ahente, na kundi natin kapamilya ay kapuso, kaibigan o kakilala.

Gaya ng ibang planholders ng ibang kumpanya, bumili sila hindi dahil kina Sobrepena o Colayco o Alba o kahit sinong demonyo dyan kundi dahil sa mga ahenteng nagalok sa kanila.


At Monday, June 06, 2005 5:15:55 PM, Anonymous said... "

It just so happens the "agent" who offered me the educational plan is the same people of Malayan Insurance, with whom I have a long standing relationship and TRUST.

At the same time, the agent happens to be a RCBC bank manager. Kaya nga YGC group e.

I didn't buy it because of the agent! Hindi naman sexy ang agent no? The selling point was "YUCHENGCO YAN!-It's backed up by RCBC, Malayan insurance etc. etc."- TANGA naman si ako naniwala!

I bought it since previously had good business experience with them through Malayan, then RCBC.

But now that PPI fell short of their promises- I won't make the same mistake of trusting them again.

I withdrew everything I had and closed all my accounts with RCBC,. Switch insurances and stop accepting RCBC checks from my customers!

Ako lang naman eto, Oh, I forgot to mention, my relatives and friends too!

 
At Sunday, October 09, 2005 1:11:00 AM, Blogger PolarTrader said...

Great Blog, check out this business. This is the Goose that lays you Golden Eggs! how to trade e currency
Submit your Articles and get lot of backlinks: http://articles.for-your-website.com/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
At Sunday, October 09, 2005 4:14:00 PM, Blogger heropoo said...

Help! I am lost. I was searching for capital one credit card and somehow ended up here. How that happened I don't know, however I do like your Blog a lot. Would you mind if I add your Blog to my favorites page so others can visit?

 
At Monday, October 10, 2005 9:00:00 PM, Blogger startonline said...

Your blog is excellent - keep it up! Don't miss visiting this site about apply online for credit card. It pretty much covers apply online for credit card related stuff.

 
At Wednesday, October 12, 2005 2:47:00 AM, Blogger St Louis Cardinals BUFF said...

So many blogs and only 10 numbers to rate them. I'll have to give you a 10 because you have done a good job. Great Job,

Free Access To More Information Aboutfamily internet

 
At Thursday, October 13, 2005 5:30:00 AM, Blogger PolarTrader said...

I have a foreign exchange capital market Site. It pretty much covers foreign exchange capital market related stuff.

Check it out if you get time :-)

 
At Thursday, October 13, 2005 11:43:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, you have a great blog here! I'm definitely going to bookmark your site!

I have a fund investing mutual
site. It pretty much covers fund investing mutual
related stuff.

Come and check it out if you get time :--)

 
At Friday, October 14, 2005 10:17:00 AM, Blogger The Real Estate Answer Man said...

Find Out What The Real Estate Investment "GURUS" Either Don't Know Or Aren't Telling You

Click Here For More
Information



robert kyosaki

 
At Friday, October 14, 2005 8:09:00 PM, Blogger The Answer Man said...

Real Estate investors........ Are You Sick Of The "UGLY HOUSE", "Fix And Flip" Or Rental Property Game And All Of The Headaches That Come With It?

Click Here For More
Information


commercial real estate

 
At Friday, October 21, 2005 7:05:00 PM, Blogger De Post Man said...

Informative post. Take a look at my credit site ( http://mortgage.27days27gurus.com/ ) f you can. Thanks home equity line of credit

 
At Tuesday, October 25, 2005 4:43:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just noticed your blog about credit equity equity home home line loan and wanted you to know how well you presented the information. Excellent job! I have a website about credit equity equity home home line loan so I know what I'm talking about when I say your information is top-notch. Keep up the great work - you're providing a real service to the Internet community.

 
At Tuesday, October 25, 2005 6:18:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nice site. Check mine out if you can. mutual fund investing

 
At Monday, October 31, 2005 10:00:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hello,
Great blog with some useful info on irwin home equity. I have a irwin home equity themed site you and your visitors might find interesting. I'd love for you to check it out.

 
At Friday, November 04, 2005 10:29:00 AM, Blogger Goodman441 said...

Hello, this is a great blog on mortgage loan, Please visit my site when you get a chance at http://www.loanofficial.com

 
At Wednesday, November 09, 2005 12:50:00 AM, Blogger mwcart said...

Super blog you have. Did you know you can find information about Credit Card Processing
at Credit Card Processing
. Check it out if you have a change. I'll be sure and visit your blog again.

 
At Wednesday, July 19, 2006 8:23:00 PM, Anonymous automobile insurance standard invoice said...

Your blog I found to be very interesting!
I just came across your blog and wanted to
drop you a note telling you how impressed I was with
the information you have posted here.
I have a automobile insurance standard invoice
site.
Come and check it out if you get time :-)
Best regards!

 
At Monday, April 14, 2014 11:30:00 PM, Blogger nancy Alfred said...

Magandang Araw,

Kailangan mo ba ng isang loan upang mapagsama-sama ang iyong mga utang? Sigurado ka na nangangailangan ng isang pautang sa pananalapi ang iyong negosyo? automobile pagbili, bahay pautang pagbili at iba pang mga personal na pautang atbp bigyan namin out mahaba term na pautang para sa 5-50 taon maximum na may 3% interes Pagkatapos ay ikaw ay sa tamang lugar. Huwag mag-atubiling makipag-ugnay sa akin sa pamamagitan ng aking email address: havillsloanhome@gmail.com

Impormasyon Personal na:
Ang iyong Pangalan: _______________
Ang iyong Bansa: _____________
Ang iyong Address: ______________
Ang iyong Trabaho: ____________
Buwanang suweldo: ____________
Halaga ng Pautang para sa Kailangan ng: ________
Tagal ng Pautang: _____________
Ang numero ng mobile phone: ________

Magpapadala ako Naghihintay sa iyong mail kasama ang impormasyong ito napuno sa lalong madaling panahon.

Aking Regards,
Mr Andy Murray.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home