Initially, when it was known that the investment club Cash Plus was in trouble, it was rumoured that the high-interest scheme was 'getting a fight' from more established interests.

As such, after its demise, some investors tried to organise a consumer ban on the organisations they held chiefly accountable for their loss.

The STAR reported Thursday that Wayne Chen, head of the Super Plus chain of supermarkets, dismissed reports that the supposed boycott had had a negative effect on his organisation. However, he said something that those intent on blaming someone for their loss should take seriously into consideration. Chen said:

"Why are people who put their money in Cash Plus now blaming Super Plus for their demise?"

Why indeed, we ask also, not only about Super Plus but about any organisation or individual, but themselves. Even those without a shred of education in financial matters know that the higher the rate of return on an investment the higher the risk and any instrument which returns over 100 per cent annually must be extremely risky.

In addition, no one was coerced into joining Cash Plus or any other high return investment scheme. They joined of their own free will and must accept responsibility for their actions, suffering the loss just as they would have enjoyed or were enjoying the high returns.

And what would the disgruntled investors behind the attempted boycott do, cause Super Plus to shut down and many people to lose their jobs just because they made a decision of their own free will?

We understand the anger at the loss, but fear it is misdirected.