Tuesday, July 21, 2009

Lessons From The Astro Exercise



Even when you predict correctly that a corporate exercise is forthcoming, you still risk not making money and even losing money because you do not have all the details of the exercise. Unless I am the actual CFO handling the deal or the bankers advising the deal, the risk in not knowing everything is there. If I do know everything, then I would be dealing on insider information, which is illegal.

a) Its likely to be a sale of foreign operations to Usaha Tegas, which is not a buyout offer for Astro shares. A buyout would set a minimum price to be offered to shareholders, thus raising the bar and transaction platform towards that level. Say the buyout is RM4.00 or RM4.20, the share price would gravitate towards that level. Since this is not a buyout of Astro shares, there may be some disappointment, hence some who were holding trading positions got out.

b) Silly to suspend the shares for one session and then to announce NOTHING. This is very poor form by Astro. Why suspend for one session and say nothing??? You could have made the same announcement that the company is considering some alternatives, without needing to suspend the shares. You suspend then NOTHINg concrete comes out, people will be disappointed.

c) The Straits Times seems to have a scoop on the coming deal. It cited a RM1 special dividend, which is very good. Getting rid of the cumbersome foreign operations to Usaha Tegas will bring cash to Astro without the accompanying risk and uncertainty and gestation period needed to bring forth positive cash flow from the overseas operations. But Astro made no such announcement??!!

d) How should one regard the shares at this juncture? I would still hold it till a proper announcement is made.


p/s photo: Ema Fujisawa

Monday, July 20, 2009

Do Take This Zoomerang Survey!!!







http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/?p=WEB229FBABM2GC


This survey was created by me personally to gauge readers and visitors views on the markets, on the female photos and other issues. It will only take one minute. Click on link to start the survey. Cheers!!


Most Expensive Places To Park Your Cars







Colliers International, a property company, has come out with an interesting survey on global parking rates. European cities have some of the highest daily parking rates, with Amsterdam and London coming out on top. Tokyo is the most expensive place to leave your car outside Europe. Honolulu is second behind New York among America's cities. Drivers in London fork out the most for a monthly unreserved space. The cheapest parking in the survey is in India, where a spot in Chennai costs 96 cents a day.

I should really not complain about my RM150 ($41) monthly parking fee. Parking can be a major cost factor in determining whether people drive to work or not. In HK, its very easy to own a car, it costs a lot more to park it.

Parking is one thing, the other is toll rates. While we bitch about our tolls, many cities have "restricted zones" that charges according to the time of entry. The thing to bear in mind is that if you are going to make it prohibitive to own and drive a car to work, make bloody sure the infrastructure and alternative modes of (affordable) transportation are available.

Saturday, July 18, 2009

Astro - Whoops!!! There It Is!!!




































Well, you didn't have to wait 2-3 weeks after all. The restructuring plan is even better than I had anticipated because it takes out the troublesome international operations. Good luck to those who got in.

KUALA LUMPUR, July 18 — Malaysian tycoon Ananda Krishnan is set to restructure his premier satellite television operator, Astro All Asia Networks, in a RM9 billion transaction that will rank as the region's largest corporate exercise so far this year.

Under the proposed corporate deal, Astro's two main shareholders — the Ananda-controlled private investment company Usaha Tegas and Malaysia's state-owned Khazanah Holdings — will acquire the satellite television company's fledgling and still unprofitable international business interests.

The planned hive-off of its international business will turn the Malaysian-listed Astro into a clean entity that will house its profitable domestic operations, bankers close to the transaction told The Straits Times.

The corporate restructuring exercise, which could be announced as early day after tomorrow, will also feature a major sweetener for the company' shareholders.

The company is set to announce a one-off dividend payment of about RM1 per share, the bankers said, adding that the whole deal will value Astro at around RM9 billion.

The planned transaction is set to remove the drag on Astro's share performance, which has been bogged down by problems in its international operations.

Speculation that a restructuring is imminent has re-ignited interest in the stock in recent weeks.

Astro shares, which have been hovering at just under RM2.80 apiece for much of the year, currently trade at around RM3.50 apiece.

A windfall for shareholders is emerging as a hallmark of Ananda's large corporate manoeuvres.

When he launched his buyout of his listed mobile telecommunications company, Maxis Communications, in May 2007, he paid sharp premium for the shares held by the public in a deal valued at over RM16 billion.

According to bankers involved in the Maxis transaction, government-controlled entities such as Khazanah, Permodalan Nasional, the Muslim pilgrimage fund Tabung Haji and the two national pension funds collectively received just over RM7.5 billion for their holdings in the mobile telco.

Under the soon-to-be-announced Astro transaction, Khazanah, the state investment agency modelled along the lines of Singapore's Temasek Holdings, will receive close to RM340 million from the dividend payout, bankers with knowledge of the deal said.

Khazanah will also retain its 22 per cent interest in the listed Malaysian entity and control a roughly 33 per cent stake in the private vehicle that will house Astro international business.

Ananda's Usaha Tegas and its other affiliates will control the remainder in the yet-to-be-named private entity, the bankers said.

Over the past decade, the 71-year-old Ananda — who is ranked as one of South-east Asia's wealthiest tycoons — has emerged as a powerful force in the region's multimedia sector, with Astro and Maxis forming the cornerstones of his new-media empire.

Astro, which has invested over RM1 billion to develop its own content for the region's large Malay-language speaking population, beams its services to more than three million households currently. Bankers say the company's customer base could hit 3.5 million in the next three years.

But results from its overseas investments have been mixed.

Its foray into Indonesia, under a joint venture project with the powerful Lippo Group controlled by the Riady family, has been a disaster.

Astro is now caught in a messy legal wrangle with Lippo and has been forced to make provision for losses of just over RM1 billion for its investment in the Indonesian venture.

The company has moved into the entertainment and media markets in India, China and other parts of South-east Asia, and bankers estimate that Astro will require investment of over RM1 billion in the next three years to develop these markets. — ST

p/s photos: Reon Kadena

Latest US Economic Outlook By Roubini




July 16, 2009

STATEMENT ON U.S. ECONOMIC OUTLOOK BY DR. NOURIEL ROUBINI



The following is a statement from Dr. Nouriel Roubini, Chairman of RGE Monitor and Professor, New York University, Stern School of Business:


“It has been widely reported today that I have stated that the recession will be over “this year” and that I have “improved” my economic outlook. Despite those reports - however – my views expressed today are no different than the views I have expressed previously. If anything my views were taken out of context.

“I have said on numerous occasions that the recession would last roughly 24 months. Therefore, we are 19 months into that recession. If as I predicted the recession is over by year end, it will have lasted 24 months with a recovery only beginning in 2010. Simply put I am not forecasting economic growth before year's end.

“Indeed, last year I argued that this will be a long and deep and protracted U-shaped recession that would last 24 months. Meanwhile, the consensus argued that this would be a short and shallow V-shaped 8 months long recession (like those in 1990-91 and 2001). That debate is over today as we are in the 19th month of a severe recession; so the V is out of the window and we are in a deep U-shaped recession. If that recession were to be over by year end – as I have consistently predicted – it would have lasted 24 months and thus been three times longer than the previous two and five times deeper – in terms of cumulative GDP contraction – than the previous two. So, there is nothing new in my remarks today about the recession being over at the end of this year.

“I have also consistently argued – including in my remarks today - that while the consensus predicts that the US economy will go back close to potential growth by next year, I see instead a shallow, below-par and below-trend recovery where growth will average about 1% in the next couple of years when potential is probably closer to 2.75%.

“I have also consistently argued that there is a risk of a double-dip W-shaped recession toward the end of 2010, as a tough policy dilemma will emerge next year: on one side, early exit from monetary and fiscal easing would tip the economy into a new recession as the recovery is anemic and deflationary pressures are dominant. On the other side, maintaining large budget deficits and continued monetization of such deficits would eventually increase long term interest rates (because of concerns about medium term fiscal sustainability and because of an increase in expected inflation) and thus would lead to a crowding out of private demand.

“While the recession will be over by the end of the year the recovery will be weak given the debt overhang in the household sector, the financial system and the corporate sector; and now there is also a massive re-leveraging of the public sector with unsustainable fiscal deficits and public debt accumulation.

“Also, as I fleshed out in detail in recent remarks the labor markets is still very weak: I predict a peak unemployment rate of close to 11% in 2010. Such large unemployment rate will have negative effects on labor income and consumption growth; will postpone the bottoming out of the housing sector; will lead to larger defaults and losses on bank loans (residential and commercial mortgages, credit cards, auto loans, leveraged loans); will increase the size of the budget deficit (even before any additional stimulus is implemented); and will increase protectionist pressures.

“So, yes there is light at the end of the tunnel for the US and the global economy; but as I have consistently argued the recession will continue through the end of the year, and the recovery will be weak and at risk of a double dip, as the challenge of getting right the timing and size of the exit strategy for monetary and fiscal policy easing will be daunting.


p/s photos: Kristy Yeung Kung Yu

Friday, July 17, 2009

Which Is Worse?



I hate it a lot when I come across corrupt cops, but what if you get stupid cops? If you have to choose, always choose the corrupt ones because the stupid ones can kill you accidentally with just an "... oops".

Earlier in the week in HK, a few police officers were trying to stop 14 cars which were racing furiously with each other in Kwun Tong at around 2am ... I guess , much like the Federal Highway after 11pm (oh, btw, don't ever drive on the extreme right lane after 11pm on Federal Highway ... its meant for mini-Protons and Peroduas trying to turn Federal Highway into an autobahn). Anyway back to the story, these police officers stopped 5 cars (3 taxis, a truck and a private car) to help create a roadblock to stop the racing cars. That is still alright, the stupid thing was that the police asked the drivers of the 5 cars to remain in their cars!!! According to The Standard, it was more like the drivers were forced to remain in their cars. Mind you, its supposed to be a roadblock and you were going to be watching and waiting for 14 cars coming at you ...

End result, 6 out of the 14 cars that were racing each other plowed into the roadblock. Surprisingly, only 5 drivers were arrested, one even managed to run away while the other 8 cars made a u-turn and zoomed away to freedom. One of the 3 taxi drivers reported that one cop told him that he was just following orders and the driver should complain with his commander.

The Police Commissioner has not reprimanded anyone or sacked anyone yet. The rule of law is that cars being used by the police or under police direction is not covered by insurance, and will have to be claimed from the police. The Police Force in HK is lucky in that none of the 5 decent members of the public died acting as roadblocks. If they did, the insurance company will surely not pay for "accidental death". The policemen will be sued for manslaughter. The Police Force will be sued for compensation and derided as callous idiots.

The case could have greater ramifications if people had died as part of the roadblock. Do you charge the drivers that were racing? Do you charge the police officers? I guess both, and I wouldn't want to be the presiding judge here as attributing blame and cause would be extremely tricky.

Naturally the public were outraged, while at the same time making deserving sarcastic comments about those police officers. Its mind numbingly stupid. Would the officers had asked their own children or parents to remain in the cars in the roadblock???

Police Commissioner Tang King-shing made a public apology following public outcry over the crackdown on illegal road racing early on Monday morning which had was said to endanger the safety of other motorists. Tang said preliminary investigation showed police had made mistakes when they planned the operation. The commissioner said police thoroughly considered the personal safety of the public before they conducted any operation. But he made an apology to those who were injured during the impromptu action against illegal racers on the Kwun Tong bypass which had resulted in pile-up and chase on the highway, leading to six people being injured including a taxi driver and two police officers. In the incident, five racers, aged between 23 and 26, were arrested for furious driving.


p/s photos: Fiona Xie

Why I Would Buy Astro Now


We all know the story, you can be buying because of the story 3 months ago or even 6 months ago. Why now for me? My views:

1) Ananda will take the bloody thing private because markets never value Astro properly.

2) The disparity in valuation looks at Astro as just a normal business, and not sufficient merit is given to it as a near monopoly, and its library of assets.

3) The lawsuits in Indonesia basically will hamper any investor interest for some time, might as well take it private.

4) Taking it private, then cleaning up the legalities, and reinjecting into a bigger media concern would be the way to go.

5) But why now... its because I like the volume traded, I like the price movements, and I like the timing (not like 6 months ago when bank lending is tight and there were a lot more uncertainty then)

I would buy up to RM3.70 for a 2-3 week hold. A buyout if it eventuates, should be in the vicinity of RM4.20. I doubt I would lose money even if Ananda stays on the sidelines.


p/s photo: Karen Mok

Some Dirty Tricks By (Unscrupulous) Financial Planners


Like I said before, every profession has their bad hats. The new-fangled financial planners are no different. Here are some tricks to watch out for:

Dirty little secret #1

Many financial planners work to sales targets. For these planners the need to increase revenues is included in financial planners' key performance indicators or in their job descriptions.

In some cases these targets may be a figure - say $55,000 in revenue generated a quarter, breaking down to roughly $7000 a week. The way a planner gets to these targets is not by selling advice; it is by selling products with up-front fees and commissions.

Dirty little secret #2

Some banks' financial planners are ranked in "league tables'' based on who sells the most. This little secret blows away any thoughts that Joe Blow planner is a disinterested adviser.

If major planning groups keep and internally publish league tables on how their financial planners are performing in terms of "sales'' it is hard to see a workforce being motivated to offer impartial financial advice. It cements the above-mentioned industry bias towards sales people rather than advisers.

Dirty little secret #3

In the boom years, a planner on a $60,000 salary could earn up to $70,000 on top of that in commission-based payments.

Yes, we have heard a lot about commissions. Yes, we hear that commissions can lead financial planners to offer products they may not actually believe in.

But I wonder whether we fully understand that a planner regularly offering investors advice that is not attached to some form of commission are flirting with half their likely annual salary.

Dirty little secret #4

You can't go outside the system. I have spoken to two planners who left big planning groups because they felt they were unable to offer the advice they were required to (that is, sell more stuff) rather than the advice they felt they should professionally offer people (for example, go into a term deposit).

In both cases the planners say they were counselled about their perceived failure to convert existing clients into lucrative purchasers of commission-based products.

Dirty little secret #5

Churning = earning. A planner looking to lift earnings can simply recommend new clients switch from one superannuation fund to another. While this bumps the revenue up nicely for the planner, it has some particularly nasty consequences for the unwitting client.

One, they may lose the life insurance contained in the original industry superannuation. Two, if the planner offers a substitute insurance policy they frequently get the handsome up-front commissions on the new product (which are effectively paid for by the customer any way.)

While I freely accept there are honest, committed and sincere financial planners, they are currently caught in an industry structure so tangled that it's hard to pick the good from the bad.

And before those honest planners start crying foul about unfair generalisations, it's worth remembering that everything written above is based on criticism levelled by other financial planners.

These are not practices that appear in submissions made to the Corporations and Financial Services parliamentary committee currently charged with implementing change.

But it is worth spelling them out in some detail because they are practices that have threatened the integrity of the industry as a whole.

Both the industry and the parliamentary committee need to understand these practices and how they developed to fully comprehend the need for change. Let's hope they then make changes that put the industry on a completely new footing.


p/s photos: Fiona Xie

Asia Rising - Part 5





CHINA’S GREAT REVERSAL


The story of China’s rise seems, on the surface, quite different. A communist and closed regime undertakes an efficient, massive, and rapid embrace of the global economy—and sends its country into overdrive. It appears to be a far cry from the common understanding that democracy promotes growth because it imposes constraints on rulers and reassures private entrepreneurs of the safety of their assets and fruits of their labor. The idea that China grew because of its one-party rule stems from a mistaken focus on a single snapshot in time at the expense of an understanding of shifting trends. China did not take off because it was authoritarian. Rather, it took off because the liberal political reforms of the 1980s made the country less authoritarian. Like India, when China reversed its political reforms and saw governance worsen in the 1990s, citizens’ well-being declined. Household income growth slowed, especially in the rural areas; inequality rose to an alarming level; and the gains of economic growth accruing to ordinary people fell sharply. China even underperformed in its traditional areas of strength: education and health. Adult illiteracy rose. Immunizations fell. The country’s GDP might have been booming, but it was also hazardous to your health.



The real Chinese miracle began back in the 1980s—when Chinese politics was most liberal. Personal income growth outpaced GDP growth; the labor share of GDP was rising; and income distribution initially improved. China accomplished far more in poverty reduction in the 1980s without any of the factors (such as foreign direct investment) now viewed as essential elements of the China model. In four short years (1980–84), China lifted more of its rural population out of poverty than in the 15 years from 1990 to 2005 combined. If India became less democratic under Indira Gandhi, China became less authoritarian under the troika rule of Deng Xiaoping, Hu Yaobang, and Zhao Ziyang in the 1980s. Therein lies the key insight into China’s economic takeoff.

One of the first acts by the reformist leaders was to signal an improving environment for private property. In marked contrast to today’s massive land grabs, the Chinese government in 1979 returned confiscated bank deposits, bonds, gold, and private homes to those former “capitalists” the regime had persecuted. The number of people affected by this policy was not large, around 700,000. But symbolism mattered for a country still reeling from the Cultural Revolution. There were also other symbolic acts designed to elicit the confidence of private entrepreneurs in the new political environment of a post-Mao era. In 1979, two vice premiers visited and personally congratulated an entrepreneur who was granted the first license to operate a private restaurant in Beijing. As early as 1981, a Communist Party document signaled a willingness to recruit its members from the private sector, a well-publicized gesture. The widely held view that the party only began to recruit capitalists late in the Jiang Zemin era is simply incorrect.


The reformist leaders also began to embark on meaningful political changes. As scholar Minxin Pei has noted, every single important political reform—such as the mandatory retirement of government officials, the strengthening of the National People’s Congress, legal reforms, experiments in rural self-government, and loosening control of civil society groups—was instituted in the 1980s. The Chinese media became freer in the early reform era. The timing here is critical. This “directional liberalism” of China’s politics either preceded or accompanied China’s economic growth. It was not a result of economic success.


This liberalism mattered the most for growth in rural China, where the majority of Chinese citizens live. Private access to capital eased in the 1980s. Private entrepreneurship and even some privatization became widespread, especially in poorer parts of the country that needed them most. Of 12 million rural businesses classified as township and village enterprises, 10 million were completely private. The change in direction of China’s politics was sufficiently credible to encourage millions of entrepreneurs to go into business for themselves.


But in the 1990s, the Chinese state completely reversed the gradualist political reforms that the leadership began in the 1980s. This assessment comes from a well-placed insider, Wu Min, a professor at the Party School under the Shanxi Provincial Party Committee. In a 2007 article, Wu revealed that the political reform program adopted at the 13th Party Congress in 1987 implemented some substantial changes. The congress abolished the party committees in many government agencies and explicitly delineated the functions of the party and the state. After 1989, there was no progress on the political reform front, especially in reducing and streamlining the power of the Communist Party.



The political reforms of the 1980s were designed to enhance the accountability of the government by creating some checks and balances over the power of the party and by fostering intraparty democracy. Wu cites one specific measure in the 1990s to derail the reforms of the 1980s. According to Wu, in the 1990s China instituted explicit provisions prohibiting the National People’s Congress (NPC) from conducting evaluations of officials in the executive branch and the courts. Wu comments, “This is obviously a step backward.”


Just how far did this step set back China? How about nearly 30 years? Consider China’s track record when it comes to industrial fatalities. In 1979, in the aftermath of the capsizing of an oil rig that resulted in 72 deaths, the NPC held hearings at which officials in the Ministry of Petroleum Industry were called to testify. The minister was determined to have been negligent and was sacked. But since the mid-1990s, there have been hundreds of explosions and industrial accidents in China’s coal mines. Thousands of people have lost their lives. No hearings have been held, and not a single official at the rank of minister or provincial governor has ever been held explicitly responsible.


Like Indira Gandhi in the 1970s and 1980s, the Chinese state greatly centralized its economic management in the 1990s. It was another reversal from the promising reforms of a decade earlier, the gist of which was delegating decision-making to those best informed about local situations. In 1994, the central government increased substantially the shares of tax revenues going to the central coffers and abolished one of the most innovative Chinese reforms—fiscal federalism. A less well-known development in the 1990s was that the Chinese state centralized the budgetary and other functions of villages. So, even though people were voting in village elections, the officials elected exercised very little power.



The economic consequences of these reversals were substantial. The 1990s saw depressed growth in household incomes relative to GDP, which means that the average Chinese person was losing ground. The employee share of GDP —the income going to the general population—peaked in 1990, at 53.5 percent. By 2002, it had declined to 45 percent of GDP. At 45 percent, the Chinese economy in 2002 was benefiting its people less than it was in 1978, when its employee share of GDP stood at 48 percent. Similarly threatening for the poorest Chinese is a development that has garnered almost no attention: The country is backsliding on literacy. On April 2, 2007, the state-run China Daily published an article with an unusually frank title, “The ghost of illiteracy returns to haunt the country.” It reported that the number of illiterate Chinese adults increased by 30 million between 2000 and 2005. In 2005, there were 115.7 million illiterate Chinese adults, compared with 85 million in 2000. The roots of the problem began in the 1990s. Consider how literacy is defined—the ability to identify 1,500 Chinese characters by the age of 7 to 9. An adult reaching into the illiterate group by 2005 received all his or her primary education in the mid-1990s. In addition, immunization rates against DPT and measles—rising throughout the 1980s—began to decline in the 1990s. In time, China will pay dearly for these colossal failures.



In the 1990s, the nature of China’s growth was fundamentally altered. In the 1980s, growth was broad-based and positive for the poor; since then, the percentage of people benefiting from growth has narrowed, and social performance has deteriorated. The impact of this great reversal is strongest in the silent and less visible rural areas of China.


THE WAY TO REFORM


Of course, understanding the origins of India’s and China’s separate paths to development is just half the story. What’s more telling is how these two countries enacted and reacted to reforms—and what that says about the relationship between political liberalization and economic growth.


After the Soviet collapse, Chinese political elites converged on the view that China avoided the same fate because China had not reformed its politics. The truth is precisely the opposite. The single most important reason why China survived the 1989 Tiananmen crisis is because its rural population was content. In the 1980s, rural China experienced the most radical economic and political reforms. It was reform that saved the Chinese Communist Party.


Political reforms contributed to Indian growth as well. Take the media. During the long Gandhi era, though the print media were free, the government controlled the TV stations—a more important source of information for a country with high illiteracy. The privatization of the stations in the 1990s not only enriched the quality of entertainment for the average Indian but also added transparency to Indian politics. Many corruption and bribery scandals were first exposed on TV, the effects of the exposures being magnified by the vivid images of politicians receiving cash in shady hotel rooms. That is the right way to fight corruption.


As China tightened its political grip on rural affairs in the wake of the Soviet collapse, India moved in the opposite direction. In 1992, India amended its constitution to strengthen a reform with long and deep implications—village self-government. This panchayati raj phenomenon promises to transform an urban-centered, elitist system to one that is Tocquevillian in character and is empowering women along the way. The auxiliary institutions of Indian democracy, so atrophied under Indira Gandhi, have been renewed. World Bank indicators show a notable improvement in key areas of Indian governance during the period of high growth since the mid-1990s.


In fact, India leads China in a number of important areas of reform. Throughout the 1990s, India reduced state controls on the banking sector, allowed the entry of private domestic and foreign banks, and abolished government interference in setting the equity pricing of initial public offerings on the stock exchange. China is nowhere near India in terms of pace and depth of financial reforms.



Would democracy galvanize opposition to reforms? Many progressive reformers in China hold this view, but this is a hypothesis long on fear and short on facts. Consider the following fact about Indian politics: All the reforms have been carried out by a coalition of multiple parties rather than by a single-majority ruling party. This is true of the Congress Party in the early 1990s, the Bharatiya Janata Party between 1998 and 2004, and the Congress Party today.


What about building infrastructure? Even liberals in India sometimes wish for a dose of authoritarianism here. A powerful government in China is able to sidestep all the political and legal complications and build world-class railroads, highways, water systems, and other networks overnight. Surely, authoritarianism has an edge when it comes to public works projects. But no. Building infrastructure has followed—not preceded—Chinese growth. In 1988, China had roughly 91 miles of expressway. That did not begin to change until the late 1990s, when the country poured massive resources into infrastructure. Only in the past eight to 10 years could the country claim to have infrastructure rivaling that of developed countries.


Many foreign investors think that infrastructure explains the different pace of growth between China and India. No such evidence exists. In the 1980s, India started with some infrastructural advantages over China. It had a longer system of railways, for example. Although we can debate today which country is performing better, there is no doubt that China outperformed India in the 1980s. It was reforms and social investments that propelled Chinese growth, not fancy airports and skyscrapers.


One justification for building those massive infrastructure networks is to attract FDI. For years, Western economists and business analysts have chided India for not following China’s lead in this area. But that criticism puts the cart before the horse. Like infrastructure, FDI follows GDP growth rather than precedes it. In the 1980s, China received very little FDI, and yet the country grew faster and more virtuously than its later growth. FDI is a result of growth, and the first order of the policy business is how to grow the economy—not how to attract FDI. As long as India can grow in the 8 to 9 percent range, even without superior infrastructure, it can easily triple or even quadruple its FDI inflows from its current level of $7 billion a year. Growth can self-finance the infrastructure truly needed for business and economic development.


China has built critical networks, such as power stations and transportation links, but since the mid-1990s, unconstrained by public voice, media scrutiny, and private land rights, Chinese leaders have wasted massive resources on urban skyscrapers that have no economic benefits. Many of them are government buildings and are extraordinarily expensive, costing more than $100 million in some cases. And the financial costs of these projects do not even begin to approach their opportunity costs—those investments in education and health China has failed to make. That a country constructed nearly 3,000 skyscrapers in Shanghai and added 30 million illiterate Chinese during the same decade is truly remarkable.


The economic dividends of political reform don’t appear overnight, which skews the timeline and confuses the cause. But by using nearly every metric, political liberalization has spurred rather than stunted growth in both China and India.


After a long hiatus, China’s leadership has rhetorically returned to a vision of the 1980s—that political reforms should be a priority. Rural China has begun to recover from the neglect of the 1990s, and rural income has grown the fastest since 1989. All this is good news. But consolidating these achievements will require a more substantial undoing of the illiberal policies of the 1990s. How India managed to emerge from its own long shadow of illiberalism offers some valuable lessons. In the past, China taught India the importance of social investments and economic opening. It is time for today’s China to take a page from India—and from the China of the 1980s—that political reforms are not antithetical to growth. They are the keys to a healthier and more sustainable foundation for the future.



p/s photos: Natalie Tong Si Wing

Thursday, July 16, 2009

Some Dirty Tricks By (Unscrupulous) Real Estate Agents


In every profession, there will be bad hats. The following article was found in Sydney Morning Herald which looked at some dirty tricks employed by certain bad hats real estate agents.

Dirty little secret #1

There is an old adage among real-estate agents, ''quote 'em low and watch 'em go. Quote 'em high and watch 'em die". The practice of under quoting is widespread and has surged again in recent months. It is when potential buyers are told a price much lower than a property's true market value and the owner's reserve. Unfortunately, under quoting is rife because it works. Every weekend hopeful buyers are lured to an auction thinking they can afford, for example, $850,000-plus for a four bedroom house in Templestowe, Melbourne, only to be broken hearted when sells for $1.51m, as happened at 45 Taparoo Road last month.

Dirty little secret #2
The reverse of under quoting is over quoting, a ploy some agents use to win business. In this case, agents promise a vendor their house will fetch a price well above its market value, whether to convince them to sell or to beat others for the right to sell it. Once the contract is signed, the agent begins to groom the owner to accept a lower price. Adding even more insult to injury is the fact that many times property is actually sold for less than it is worth. This happens when the agent can not be bothered with the hard yakka to get, for example, an extra 5 per cent for their vendor. Such agents have a churn mentality, simply finding a price the owner will accept, selling the house and moving on to the next campaign.

Dirty little secret #3
Vendors can be cheated in another way too. Very naughty agents have been known to withhold good offers made before auction, even those well above the reserve, for several reasons. Sometimes, the offer comes through another agent at the firm and the original agent doesn't want to share commission. So, the bid is never put to the vendor or is put to them but at less than the real offer to be knocked back. Other times the agency wants to promote its brand by pushing ahead with the auction no matter what. It wants the vendor to spend the full amount on advertising because it is a lighthouse to attract other buyers and sellers to the business.

Dirty little secret #4
Now we get to the dummy tricks, used by agents who never outgrew their imaginary friends. Dummy offers are when agents claim to the vendor or buyer they have an offer that is purely fabrication. This tactic is used to make buyers increase their bid in a private sale or expression of interest campaign. It can also be used to groom vendors into accepting a lower price than they want. Remember, the agent wants to sell more than anything, to get their commission. If the agent has promised an unrealistic $1m for a property, a common trick is come back with a fake offer, say $800,000. The vendor will reject it but the process of talking down from their original expectation has started.

Dirty little secret #5
Dummy bidding is another old trick in the magic bag. While in the past it was normal for auctioneers to accept bids cast by street trees and passing pigeons when action was slow, these days it has become more sophisticated. Some very sneaky agents and vendors now enlist friends to cast fake bids that push prices up. Like under quoting, dummy bidding is popular because it works. And, it is almost impossible to prove, making it still very much a part of the real estate landscape.

Now the Top Five is done, but there is one last secret worth mentioning, possibly the worst kept secret of all. The visual trickery used in advertising photos is so endemic consumers are wise to it, in a big way. Lounge rooms are stretched, power lines removed and artificial sunlight beamed in, all thanks to some serious Photoshopping. A relatively new trick is the use of flashy display furniture that is actually made on a smaller scale than real furniture to tizz up an ordinary house and make the room look bigger.

Having revealed all of that, it is easy to see why real-estate agents have a collective reputation only slightly less murky than journalists. For what it is worth, I have dealt with many agents in the course of my duties and found most to be upstanding. Whether you can trust a journalist on that is up to you.


p/s photos: Joanne Peh (really like her a lot, gonna be a great actress in Singapore)

Global Economic Recovery - Are We There Yet?



    Analysts are now revising upward their growth estimates, suggesting that the contraction of growth will be slightly less severe than was expected in February and March. However, they remain divided about whether the recovery will begin in the latter half of 2009 or be delayed until 2010. Consensus now suggests that the U.S. economy might bottom in H2 2009 and that Chinese acceleration in H2 2009 could be more pronounced. The outlook remains weak for Europe and Japan. However growth may be well below potential in 2010.

  • IMF (July): The global economy is beginning to emerge from the recession "but stabilization is uneven and the recovery is expected to be sluggish." Economic growth may be 0.5 percentage points higher than projected in April 2009 or a 1.4% contraction in 2009 and 2.5% growth in 2010. Advanced economies will contract by 3.8% in 2009 - the U.S. by 2.4% (slightly less than in April), eurozone by 4.8%, Japan by 6%, UK by 4.3%, Canada by 2.3%. Eurozone will continue to contract in 2010 (0.3) while U.S. (0.6%) Canada (1.4), Japan (1.7%) and UK (0.2%) have below potential growth
  • IMF: Emerging markets will slow sharply, growing by only 1.5% in 2009 before rebounding to 4.7% in 2010 (lower than the 6% in 2008). China to grow 7.5% in 2009 (8.5% in 2010) India 5.4% (6.5%). Asean to contract by 0.3% in 2009 before growing 3.7%) Latin America (-2.6), Eastern Europe (-5) and CIS (-5.8) to all face contractions in 2009 and sluggish growth in 2010 while the Middle east grows only 2%
  • OECD (June): now expects a 4.1% contraction in the OECD area for 2009 (from the 4.3% expected in March) followed by a 0.7% growth in 2010. Thanks to a strong economic policy effort, OECD activity now looks to be approaching its nadir but the ensuing recovery is likely to be both weak and fragile. Recovery will take hold in a staggered manner across countries, reflecting differential policy stimulus and the force of headwinds from balance sheet vulnerabilities. A recovery appears to be in motion in most large non-OECD countries. The U.S. may bottom in H2 2009 and show marginally positive growth (as will Japan). Signs of impending recovery in the euro area are not yet as clearly visible and recovery may be sluggish.
  • World Bank (June): Global GDP, after falling by a record 2.9% in 2009, is expected to recover by a modest 2.0% 2010 and by 3.2% in 2011 as banking sector consolidation, continuing negative wealth effects, elevated unemployment rates, and risk aversion are expected to weigh on demand throughout the forecast period. Despite higher growth rates in developing countries (given stronger underlying productivity and population growth), output will remain subdued. Given output losses to date—and because GDP will reach its potential growth rate only by 2011—the output gap (the gap between actual GDP and its potential), unemployment, and disinflationary pressures are projected to build over 2009 to 2011.
  • UN (May): The world economy (World Global Product) is expected to shrink by 2.6% in 2009 after a nearly 4% annual increase in 2004-2007. Despite an expected recovery (1.2% growth) in 2010, risks are on the downside in 2010. World income per capita is expected to decline by 3.7% in 2009. In a more optimistic scenario, in which the financial and credit markets are healed in 2009, world GDP could rise 2.3% in 2010.
  • In April's World Economic Outlook, the IMF forecasts that real global economic activity will contract by 1.3% in 2009 (1.8ppts lower than January's 0.5% growth prediction and 3ppts lower than in November 2008) before staging a modest recovery in 2010. In June (Reuters) it reportedly raised its forecast, suggesting global growth of 2.4% (up from 1.9% in 2010).
  • Citigroup: Recessions — in terms of declining GDP — are ending, or soon should, in many countries, and our growth forecasts have edged up in recent months in many regions. with low inflation, most major countries can afford to keep low interest rates and extensive unconventional stimulus in place for an extended period with the RBA being among the first to hike rates. Global growth is likely to contract by 2% in 2009 before increasing by 2.9% in 2010 (based on PPP weights)
  • Signs of stabilization―though scattered and sometimes contradictory―have begun to emerge. However, it is still too early to say that a sustained recovery is imminent. Global industrial production is currently down about 13% over last year, and while it may rise in the coming months due to inventory correction, the future remains murky. GDP forecasts for 2009 are still being marked down to reflect a weaker-than-expected start to the year.
  • BNP: A deeper and sharper inventory reduction, stabilization of financial confidence and policy actions may have helped bring about green shoots earlier than expected, but they may be transitory given that the countries that have had a mercantilist growth strategy have not sufficiently stimulated domestic demand to offset the hurt from falling exports.
  • RGE Monitor (April): Global economic activity is expected to contract by 1.9% in 2009. Advanced economies are expected to contract 4% in 2009. Japan and the eurozone will suffer the sharpest downturns. U.S. GDP will continue to contract, albeit at a slower pace throughout 2009, with negative growth in every quarter. Emerging markets will slow down sharply from the stellar growth rates of the past few years, with the BRIC economies growing less than half their 2008 pace of 7.5%.
  • Morgan Stanley: Massive global policy action has moved us further away from a Great Depression-type scenario, and the risks of contracting output and structural deflation have waned. Global output will probably start growing in 3Q09, with G10 output growth turning positive in 4Q. Growth for 2009 as a whole will stay firmly in negative territory for all regions except Asia excluding Japan (AXJ) (where China and India will keep growth in positive territory).
  • The global economy remains weak across the board, with no significant signs of improvement. Moreover, growth in 2010 is not a foregone conclusion.
  • Goldman: Growth in the emerging world may likely keep the global economy from contracting in 2009, but risks are tilted to the downside. The global economy may expand by about 1% y/y in 2009, down from about 3.2% in 2008. Most of that growth will come from Brazil, Russia, India and China as domestic demand growth will offset declining exports. China alone may contribute more than 60% to global growth in 2009
  • Citi: The nadir for growth in most regions remains late this year with 1.7% global growth expected, with shallow recoveries expected in 2010. The deepening global recession is creating greater challenges to policy making. Markets will face more challenges to growth after the recession due to a rise in the cost of financial inter-mediation and the potential to draw the wrong lessons from the crisis.
  • The global financial crisis is bringing an end to the vendor financing model, whereby excess consumption in the US was financed by a savings glut in the emerging world. The market will ensure this adjustment finally happens.



p/s photos: Michelle Yip Shuen

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

My Favourite / Best Posting Over The Last 3.5 Years




A friend asked me over the weekend, which was my favourite or best posting in my blog. I mean we are looking at about 40 postings a month x 12 x 3.5 = 1,680 postings ... but without hesitation, I said I am proudest with my piece on 2 HK gwailos who died within a couple of months in early 2006. I love HK movies and there had been plenty made about corruption, the ICAC and the rocking 70s in HK. In the 60s and 70s, HK was probably many times more corrupt than Malaysia and Indonesia combined now. I was always fascinated about how HK came to be where it is now. Even as early as in my Economic History classes in UNSW, I picked the same topic for my second year essay submission.
When John Cowperthwaite died in February 2006... there was an eerie silence in HK papers. I was totally disgusted, I mean these HK people were reaping the benefits of a structured "free economy" without acknowledging the person behind it.

Then to my surprise Jack Cater also passed away two months later, again, no front page news, not even page 5 or 6 or 7... OMG, without these two gentlemen, well, HK would be like ... KL or Bangkok or a more robust Shenzhen, I guess.


The very essence and vitality of HK's business reputation today was largely due to these two gwailos ... I wonder if they teach that in HK schools?

------------------------------------

The Missing Legacy

Recently, a gwailo passed away without much of a mention in HK papers. Now, I have to say that I am biased as I think the majority of the bunch of British expats being posted to HK basically had a holiday for the past 50 years. HK did become a financial center and its citizens benefited enormously for the last 30 years. It put HK on the map. Property prices went through the roof. HK became an international city. However, HK would NOT be where it is (economically) if it were not for a guy name John Cowperthwaite (JC). JC was HK's financial secretary from the crucial formative years of 1961-1971. He passed away on January 21, 2006 at the ripe old age of 90.

The sad thing is that HK media and HK people in general, failed to give due credit to this man. Sure, HK people worked hard to get to where they are, but as we all know, the structure and gameplan must be there to allow "good things" to happen in an economy.

In his first budget speech he said: "In the long run, the aggregate of decisions of individual businessmen, exercising individual judgment in a free economy, even if often mistaken, is less likely to do harm than the centralised decisions of a government, and certainly the harm is likely to be counteracted faster."
JC, very much a disciple of Adam Smith and not a modern monetarist, put in the structure and rules to promote HK's now famous laissez-faire economics.

Britain at that time was moving towards a more socialist and welfare state, and it would have been very easy for JC to replicate that for HK. Can you imagine that - having a bunch of whinging "me,me", unionised, welfare dependent Chinese in Asia!? Instead, JC took it upon himself to do "less" by eliminating tariffs, lowered the tax rate to a maximum of 15%, cut the bureaucratic red tape that stifles business. He called his policies "positive non-intervention".

To have the courage and political will to do that for HK - that should mean the world to the people of HK. In 1960, the average per capita income in Hong Kong was 28 percent of that in Britain; by 1996, it had risen to 137 percent of that in Britain. Now the per capita income of HK almost mirrors that of the US.


From The Telegraph: "From 1961 to 1971 Cowperthwaite exercised almost complete control of the colony's finances under successive governors, Sir Robert Black and Sir David Trench, who were sympathetic to his philosophy and content to give him his head. Among his peers in the Hong Kong government, it was said that only Claude Burgess, the colonial secretary, could keep him in line. "His brilliance and argumentation prevailed, and he thus made policy by ruling on all items of expenditure," said one colleague. But Cowperthwaite summed up his part in the colony's success over the decade with some modesty: "I did very little. All I did was to try to prevent some of the things that might undo it.

The measure of that success was a 50 per cent rise in real wages, and a two-thirds fall in the number of households in acute poverty. Exports rose by 14 per cent a year, as Hong Kong evolved from a trading post to a major regional hub and manufacturing base."

Sir John Cowperthwaite was knighted in 1968, and what he did for HK should be taught in schools and universities in HK. I wonder how many roads, libraries, scholarships or university halls are named after JC?

After the Asian financial implosion in 1997, HK suffered and stuttered particularly when compared to Singapore. It looks like Singapore has taken a leaf from the handiwork of JC - less is more. Instead, HK powers to be have put in more legislation and rules, which combined, have put HK on the backfoot. Two examples, the rise and rise of hedge funds in Asia - Singapore has managed to attract a lot more of them than HK, ask any fellow professionals why. The other is the rise and rise of REITs, and though HK has had a headstart, Singapore is putting in the right moves, making REITs dividends non-taxable. Again, we can expect more international REITs to come to list in Singapore in the months ahead.


HK has to learn from its mistakes but also gain lessons on things it did right before. A good way to start is to fully appreciate the things Sir John Cowperthwaite did for HK's economy, and replicate that. The fact that his passing was largely ignored in HK says a lot about where HK's economy is headed.

From First to First (525)


Sir Jack Cater's Legacy


The Missing Legacy was first written in a blog of mine dated 7 February 2006 - it was on the passing of Sir John Cowperthwaite, the person most responsible for HK's reputation as the freest economy/capitalism in the world. Cowperthwaite's passing did not get much press coverage at all in HK media, and that kinda pissed me off because a group of people who can forget so easily their "roots" and "how they got here" are doomed to lose the blueprint set by Cowperthwaite.

Now another old gwailo died, and his contribution to HK is no less than Cowperthwaite. Sir Jack Cater died on Guernsey on 14 April 2006 aged 84. He was the founding head of HK's infamous Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC), which took radical steps to combat graft in the police force in the 1970s. Cater went on to become HK's Chief Secretary, Acting Governor and Commissioner in London. Bribery had long been endemic in Hong Kong's police and civil service, but was thought of as being confined to the Chinese lower ranks, rather than expatriate officers. Calls to eradicate it were largely ignored by governors before Maclehose, who arrived in 1971. Maclehose lacked the political will to tackle the problem despite strong urgings by Cater .

If you were to do a net search, you will find Jack Cater's passing only being solemnly mentioned within the HK's government admin portal at www.news.gov.hk ... how soon we forget!


Cater even threatened to resigned in 1973 when trying to bring down Chief Superintendent Peter Godber. Godber fled HK while under investigation for amassing a fortune of several million pounds, much of it banked in Vancouver. Cater needed to strike at the top, even at one of his own, to further reinforce the dire need for eradication of corruption in HK. The developments forced the hand of Maclehose. Jack Cater was asked to form an independent anti-corruption unit with the support of a former Special Branch officer, John Prendergast.


The establishment and independence of ICAC is crucial to HK's economy. While Cowperthwaite had eradicated bureaucracy, you still needed "pure meritocracy" in the financial economic system to uphold its integrity and transparency. Only with those factors can HK gain an ever growing reputation as a true financial center - attracting professionals and companies to invest.


Cater's reputation for determined leadership had been established during the period of civil unrest in Hong Kong in 1967. He cared deeply about his work and about those closest to him, and he encouraged the careers of talented young officials - including women, who in earlier days had generally been denied promotion.

In the first year of its operation, 1974, the ICAC handled 1,798 complaints of police involvement in bribery and extortion. It was said that more than a third of all Chinese policemen were members of triad gangs which controlled prostitution, drug-running and gambling across the Territory - rackets which, as Cater pointed out, raked in more than three times the profits of the Hongkong & Shanghai Bank.


By October 1977 the Commission's uncompromising methods (it acted on anonymous tip-offs, and allowed no presumption of innocence) had caused such anger in the Police Force that 2,000 officers marched through the streets to present a protest petition, and a group of CID men stormed the ICAC's offices. Fearing a breakdown of order, Maclehose felt forced to declare an amnesty for all but the most heinous offences.

In spite of this setback, the ICAC's work continued with unflagging determination. Investigations proceeded into other government departments, notably public works, education (parents were often asked for bribes to enrol children in schools of their choice) and health (hospital patients were forced to pay up for bedpans). It was indeed a cradle-to-grave system, with bribes demanded even for burial sites. Among those most grateful for the clean-up were the drivers of Hong Kong's battered fleet of minibuses, whose fares had for many years been preyed upon by bent policemen.


The ICAC was often accused of heavy-handedness, but its intervention provoked a culture change which still stands Hong Kong in good stead while corruption remains rife in other parts of Asia. Though Cater moved on in 1978 to the top civil service post of Chief Secretary, it was at the ICAC that he made his most significant contribution. Cater was Chief Secretary from 1978 to 1981. With a rapidly growing economy, it was a golden era for HK. Cater was several times Acting Governor, and was in line to succeed Maclehose in 1982; but Margaret Thatcher was persuaded to appoint a senior diplomat, Sir Edward Youde, to commence negotiations for the eventual handover to China.

Instead Cater became HK's Commissioner in London until 1984. He then returned to Hong Kong to work in the private sector, joining China Light & Power Co - the electricity generator for Kowloon and the New Territories - and becoming head of Hong Kong Nuclear Investment Co, which was China Light's participation with Beijing in a nuclear power station venture at Daya Bay in Guangdong province. He was president of Hong Kong's Agency for Voluntary Service, a member of the Court of the University of Hong Kong and an international director of the United World Colleges, participating in the foundation of Hong Kong's own College at Shatin in the New Territories.


Again, another passing of an important gwailo being largely ignored by HK's media. Is it a gagging issue; were media companies trying not to agitate China's political HQ by not bringing up the "glory days" of British colonial influence? How many more "important gwailo septua/octo-generians" must die before HK people recognises its roots, and pay the according tributes and gratitude that are due.

One can just imagine the gulf between HK and Singapore as financial centers if "true meritocracy" did not prevail in HK. Will Cater and Cowperthwaite ever make the books of HK's recent history. The Chinese have an oft-quoted saying, "when drinking water, one must never forget its source", how they got here. Just because some of them involved people who are not Chinese does not matter, and should not matter.

Can China's Demand Strength Stir Global Demand?




# Signs that extensive government investment and credit extension are contributing to a soft landing for China are giving rise to hopes that Chinese demand might support other emerging economies. Chinese commodity imports, which have surged in volume terms, may be supporting commodity exporters in Latin America and Asia in particular, yet other imports continue to be weak.

What Countries Might Benefit From Chinese Demand?

# Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea have been more dependent on exports to China, while several South East Asian economies like Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand have lower dependency.
# The composition of Chinese imports has also shifted. Fewer intermediate goods are being sourced for the processing trade given weak demand in the G3, the ultimate recipient of such goods. This shift, if persistent, could hurt traditional exporters in East Asia like South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and Japan which have tended to be reliant on Chinese demand.
# China’s imports of commodities such as iron ore, coal and crude oil have been extraordinarily strong, increasing speculation that China is building strategic inventories of the most important commodities - boosting Latin America (especially Brazil and Chile) the ASEAN countries and Australia.
# With Latin American trade with China having increased, a Chinese slowdown would have a more significant role than one in the U.S. or the EU.
# While strong US retail sales previously pushed up exports from China, in turn boosting China’s imports, the engine for China’s economic recovery is now likely to be public works spending. Thus, China's imports from Japan may be lower than expected.

Will Chinese Recovery Lead to Import Growth?

# China seems to be sourcing an increased share of parts and intermediate goods domestically. Despite an increase in car sales, auto parts imports and autos have not increased. China has been implementing a Buy China policy for its stimulus projects which might continue to hold down China's goods and services imports.
# Over time, as China's growth shifts to more domestic sources, its demand will boost the rest of Asia. In the short-term, however, a sustainable recovery in developing Asia depends on positive developments in advanced economies. While Chinese government investment has boosted its outlook in the short-term, such efforts may provide little support in 2010 if global demand continues to be weak. A reduction in Chinese exports and export related capex could lead to weaker potential GDP over the next three to five years.
# Overall, Chinese imports continue to seem weaker than would be anticipated during an investment boom. Land purchases may account for a significant share of the reported Fixed asset increase.
# There is a risk that Chinese investment might be contributing to further overcapacities and domestic imbalances. If China (and other export economies) continue to export capacity rather than boost consumption in the face of global demand, it could weaken the prospects of global economic recovery.
# The rebound in China’s exports since early in 2009 has been weaker than in most other Asian countries, suggesting that China has been a major driver in Asian countries’ export recovery.
# China can lead but that will not be enough to save the world or the other Asian economies.
# China generates only 7% of global output, at market prices; moreover, real imports are likely to fall 5% in 2009 . China's net stimulus to the rest of the world will only be around 0.1% of global output.
# A slowdown to 6% or less in China’s growth rate would have significant impact on the already weak global economy.
# Even if it escapes a hard landing and achieves 7-8% growth, subpar GDP growth in China over the next two years at least will weigh on global growth.
# Income increases in East Asian countries and currency appreciation would cause large increases in consumption imports (those that are consumed at home). In 2006, in addition, U.S. consumption goods imports in 2006 equaled $430 billion while East Asian consumption goods imports equaled $220 billion.


p/s photos: Zhang Xin Yu

Asia Rising - Part 4


"America Is Losing Influence in Asia."


Definitely not. Bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan and mired in a deep recession, the United States certainly looks like a superpower in decline. Its influence in Asia has apparently receded as well, with the formerly mighty dollar in less demand than the Chinese yuan and the North Korean regime openly flaunting Washington's will. But it is premature to declare the end of U.S. geopolitical preeminence in Asia. In all likelihood, the self-correcting mechanisms in its political and economic systems will enable the United States to recover from its current setbacks.


America's leadership in Asia derives from many sources, not just its military or economic heft. Like beauty, a country's geopolitical influence is often in the eye of the beholder. Although some view the United States' declining influence in Asia as a fact, many Asians think otherwise. Sixty-nine percent of Chinese, 75 percent of Indonesians, 76 percent of South Koreans, and 79 percent of Japanese in the Chicago Council's surveys said that U.S. influence in Asia had risen over the past decade.


Another, perhaps more important, reason for the enduring American preeminence in Asia is that most countries in the region welcome Washington as the guarantor of Asia's peace. Asian elites from New Delhi to Tokyo continue to count on Uncle Sam to keep a watchful eye on Beijing.


Whether it's over blown or not, Asia is poised to increase its geopolitical and economic influence rapidly in the decades to come. It has already become one of the pillars of the international order. But in thinking about Asia's future, let's not get ahead of ourselves. Its economic ascent is not written in the stars. And given the cultural differences and history of intense rivalry among the region's countries, Asia is unlikely to achieve any degree of regional political unity and evolve into an EU-like entity in our lifetime. Henry Kissinger once famously asked, "Who do I call if I want to call Europe?" We can ask the same question about Asia.


All told, Asia's rise should present more opportunities than threats. The region's growth not only has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty, but also will increase demand for Western products. Its internal fissures will allow the United States to check the geopolitical influence of potential rivals such as China and Russia with manageable costs and risks. And hopefully, Asia's rise will provide the competitive pressures urgently needed for Westerners to get their own houses in order—without succumbing to hype or hysteria.



"The Next Asian Miracle"

Democracies are peaceful, representative—and terrible at boosting an economy. Or at least that’s the conventional wisdom in Asia, where for years growth in India’s sprawling democracy has been humbled by China’s efficient, state-led boom. But India’s newfound economic success flips that notion on its head. Could it be that democracy is good for growth after all? If so, China better watch its back.


Consider the experiences of the following two Asian countries. In 1990, Country A had a per capita GDP of $317; Country B’s stood at $461. By 2006, Country A, though 31 percent poorer than Country B only 16 years earlier, had caught up: It enjoyed a per capita GDP of $634, compared with Country B’s $635. So, if you had to guess, which of these two Asian countries would you assume is a democracy?

You might be tempted to conclude that the better-performing country is authoritarian China and the laggard is democratic India. In reality, the faster-growing country is India, and the laggard is the occasionally autocratic Pakistan. This fact certainly belies the commonly held notion that—especially among Asian countries—authoritarian states have an advantage in growing an economy compared with their democratic counterparts, who are forced to reckon with such pesky trappings as labor standards and political compromises.


But surely, the familiar China-India comparison would support an authoritarian edge, right? The conclusion seems so obvious: China is authoritarian, and it has grown faster; India is democratic, and it has grown more slowly. For years, Indians have defended their democracy with a sheepish apology—“Yes, our growth rate is terrible, but low growth rates are an acceptable price to pay to govern a democracy as large and as diverse as India.”


There is no need to apologize now. India has ended the infamous 2 to 3 percent annual “Hindu rate” of growth and begun its own economic takeoff. Recent Indian success is not only impressive in terms of its speed—growing at the “East Asian rate” of 8 to 9 percent a year—but also in terms of its depth and breadth. The Indian miracle is no longer confined to the much vaunted information-technology sector; its manufacturing is taking off. Even the historically lackluster agricultural sector is beginning to grow.


So where does this leave the “authoritarian edge” that China’s economy has supposedly enjoyed for years? The emerging Indian miracle should debunk—hopefully permanently—the entirely specious notion that democracy is bad for growth. And the emerging Indian miracle holds substantial implications for China’s political future. As Chinese political elites mark the 30th anniversary of economic reforms this year, they should reflect on the Indian experience deeply and absorb the real reason behind their own miracle.


The idea that there is a trade-off between economics and politics is ingrained in the minds of many policymakers and business executives in Asia, as well as the West. But that idea has never been systematically proven. If India, with its noisy, chaotic, and lumbering political arrangements, can grow, then no other poor country must face a Faustian choice between growth and democracy. A deeper look at the two countries shows that they have succeeded and failed at different times for remarkably similar reasons. Their economies performed when their politics turned liberal; their performances faltered when their politics slid backward. Now, as many poor countries grapple with similar political and economic choices, we must understand this dynamic. It is high time to get the China-India story right.

INDIA’S UNTOLD HISTORY

That story doesn’t begin in 2008. It’s a horse race that goes back decades, and one that tells us much about the relationship between democracy and growth, governance and prosperity. From an economic perspective, it is not the static state of a political system that matters, but how it has evolved. The growth India enjoys today sped up in the 1990s as the country privatized TV stations, introduced political decentralization, and improved governance. And contrary to the conventional wisdom, India stagnated historically not because it was a democracy, but because, in the 1970s and 1980s, it was less democratic than it appeared. To understand just what is happening in India’s economy today—and how it relates to the country’s political system—we must travel as far back as the 1950s.


Many scholars blame India’s first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, for adopting a development strategy that caused India to stagnate from 1950 to 1990. But this view is unfair to Nehru, and it shifts the blame from the real culprit—Indira Gandhi, Nehru’s daughter and prime minister during much of the period from 1966 to 1984. Nehru’s commanding-heights approach was the reigning ideology in many developing countries, some of which, like South Korea, were quite successful. The issue is not how harmful Nehru’s economic policies were, but why India intensified and persisted in this model when it was clearly not working. To answer this question we have to understand the lasting damage that Indira Gandhi inflicted on Indian democracy.


Patronage became her electoral strategy as she undermined a vital institution in a functioning democracy—the party system. Gandhi weakened the Congress Party, once a proud catalyst of the independence movement, by sidestepping many of its well-established procedures, reducing its grass-roots reach in the states, and appointing party officials rather than allowing rank-and-file members to elect them. The shriveling of the Congress Party meant that Gandhi had to use other means to get reelected: crushing political opposition, pandering to special interests, or offering political handouts.


Or cancellations of elections altogether. Indira Gandhi imposed emergency rule in June 1975 and cancelled the general election scheduled for the following year. It was no isolated event. As early as 1970, she postponed or cancelled Congress Party elections. In addition, she moved very far to replace federalism with her own centralized rule. One telling statistic, as shown by political scientists Amal Ray and John Kincaid, is that between 1966 and 1976 the Gandhi government invoked Article 356 of the constitution—which empowers the federal government to take over the functions of state governments in emergency situations—36 times. The government of Nehru and his successor (1950–65) resorted to this measure only nine times. From 1980 to 1984, she invoked this power an additional 13 times. The misuse of the extraordinary power vested in the executive damaged an important institution of Indian democracy.


The cumulative effect of Gandhi’s actions is that the Indian political system, though still retaining some essential features of a democracy, became unaccountable, corrupt, and unhinged from the normal bench marks voters use to assess their leaders. In a functioning democracy, voters punish those politicians who fail to deliver at the ballot box. Not in India. Both the 1967 and 1971 reelections of the Congress Party followed a decline of per capita GDP the year before. It was not democracy that failed India; it was India that failed democracy.


The economic consequences of this period of illiberalism were long lasting. Because Gandhi’s political fortunes depended on patronage, she felt no compulsion to invest in real drivers of economic growth—education and health. The ratio of teachers to primary-school students throughout the long Gandhi years stubbornly hovered around 2 percent. After her rule, in 1985, only 18 percent of Indian children were immunized against diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus (DPT), and only 1 percent were immunized against measles. Even today, India is still paying for her neglect. The low level of human capital remains the single largest obstacle to that country’s developmental prospects.

The good news is that India is shedding this harmful legacy. As Indian politics became more open and accountable, the post-Gandhi governments began to put welfare of the people at the top of the policy agenda. For example, the adult literacy rate increased from 49 percent in 1990 to 61 percent in 2006. In due time, these social investments will translate into real dividends.



p/s photos: Huang Sheng Yi

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

State Of Play - Internet Access Markets In Asia-Pacific



I managed to get my hands on a few reports on Internet Access markets in Asia-Pacific, which I think is a very important indicator for the future of the region. I shall try to consolidate the salient points. The Internet access market consists of the total revenues generated by Internet Service Providers (ISPs) from the provision of narrow band and broadband Internet connections to Internet subscribers. Asia-Pacific comprises Australia, China, Japan, India, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan.

The Asia-Pacific internet access market generated total revenues of $69.4 billion in 2008, representing a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 21.7% for the period spanning 2004-2008. The number of internet subscribers increased with a CAGR of 14% between 2004-2008, to reach a total of 151.9 million in 2008. The performance of the market is forecast to decelerate, with an anticipated CAGR of 14.2% for the five-year period 2008-2013, which is expected to drive the market to a value of $135 billion by the end of 2013.

The Asia-Pacific internet access market generated total revenues of $69.4 billion in 2008, representing a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 21.7% for the period spanning 2004-2008. In comparison, the Americas and European markets grew with CAGRs of 10.7% and 12.8%, respectively, over the same period, to reach respective values of $64 billion and $51.4 billion in 2008. The number of internet subscribers increased with a CAGR of 14% between 2004- 2008, to reach a total of 151.9 million in 2008. The number of subscribers is expected to rise to 253.9 million by the end of 2013, representing a CAGR of 10.8% for the 2008-2013 period.

The performance of the market is forecast to decelerate, with an anticipated CAGR of 14.2% for the five-year period 2008-2013, which is expected to drive the market to a value of $135 billion by the end of 2013. Comparatively, the Americas and European markets will grow with CAGRs of 8% and 6.4%, respectively, over the same period, to reach respective values of $93.8 billion and $70 billion in 2013.

The 3 biggest and leading players for Internet Access in Asia-Pacific are:

1) China Telecom - China Telecom has a single operating segment: wireline. It provides wireline telecommunication services, wireline internet, value added services, managed data services, and leased line services to residential, government and business customers. The company primarily operates in China. The company is headquartered in Beijing, China and has around 285,105 employees. The company provides telecommunications services in 20 provinces of China including Shanghai municipality, Guangdong, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Anhui, Fujian, Jiangxi, Chongqing municipality, Sichuan, Hubei, Hunan, Hainan, Shaanxi, Gansu, Qinghai, Ningxia, Hui autonomous region, and Xinjiang.

The wireline telephone services of the company include local, long distance, and interconnection services. China Telecom had 220 million local telephone subscribers towards the end of 2007. China Telecom offers primary internet access services to residential and medium enterprise customers. It provides broadband services to business and residential customers through fiber optic networks. The company had about 35 million broadband subscribers at the end of FY2007.

China Telecom offers managed data services such as digital data network services, which enable data transmission at 64 Kbps to 2 Mbps and serves small and medium enterprise customers. It also offers frame relay or Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) services. ATM technology supports high speed data transfers.

2) KT Freetel - KT Freetel Co. (KTF) is a mobile communication company. The company's activities include the provision of code division multiple access (CDMA) engineering consulting services, wireless data telecommunication solutions, technology-related training and consulting services. The company also provides wideband CDMA (WCDMA) services under the brand name 'SHOW'. The company operates in South Korea where it is headquartered in Songpa Gu, Seoul, and employs about 2,555 people. The company is involved in various activities that include: the provision of code division multiple access (CDMA) engineering consulting services, including the planning and design of wired and wireless networks, network installation and testing, and network maintenance and optimization; the provision of wireless data telecommunication solutions, such as mobile data services based on short message service (SMS), wired and wireless integrated telecommunication services and multipack services based on CDMA, and the provision of technology-related training and consulting services. The company also provides WCDMA (wideband code division multiple access CDMA) services under the brand name 'SHOW'.

3) NTT - Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation (NTT) is a Japan-based telecommunications provider. The company operates through wholly owned subsidiaries, Nippon Telegraph and Telephone East Corporation (NTT East), and Nippon Telegraph and Telephone West Corporation (NTT West), which have monopolies in their markets; the long distance carrier NTT Communications Corporation (NTT Communications); mobile carrier NTT DoCoMo; NTT Data and various other subsidiaries. The company primarily operates in Japan. It is headquartered in Tokyo, Japan and employs about 193,831 people.

The company's long distance and international communications segment offers international communications services and related ancillary services. IP/packet communications services handled by the long distance and international communications business include OCN, IP-VPN and frame relay. Under the mobile communications segment, the company operates thorough NTT DoCoMo Group in Japan. NTT DoCoMo is 65.3% owned by NTT.

The company offers its third generation (3G) services through FOMA (Freedom of Mobile multimedia Access) over Wide Code Division Multiple Access (W-CDMA standard). IP/packet communications services handled by the mobile communications business segment include i-mode. i-mode service is a wireless, packet-based Internet-access service using a system that transmits information that has been divided into blocks called packets.

The Future

By the year 2013, the Asia-Pacific internet access market is forecast to have a value of $135 billion, an increase of 94.6% from 2008. The compound annual growth rate of the market in the period 2008-2013 is predicted to be 14.2%.

In terms of subscribers, by the year 2013, the Asia-Pacific internet access market is forecast to have 253.9 million internet subscribers, an increase of 67.2% from 2008. The compound annual growth rate of the market volume in the period 2008-2013 is predicted to be 10.8%.


p/s photos: Sheila Majid (over the years)

Modified Loans Plan By Obama's Administration Not Working




As the tables below show, loan mods seem to lead to subsequent default with distressing regularity. They illustrate the fundamental flaw in the notion, widely embraced, not least by the Obama administration, that loan modification is salvation for troubled homeowners, beleaguered builders and lenders. Loan mods are designed to keep the unpaid principal balances of the lender’s loans intact while re-levering the borrower. Mortgage modifications turn homeowners into underwater, over levered renters for life, unable to sell, re-buy, refinance, shop or save. They turn homeowners into economic zombies. On the left we see the re-default rates of homeowners who were current on their loans when they first defaulted (sounds odd, I know, but these tend to be people who can afford their homes but who subsequently ran into economic problems). The data tells us how many of them have defaulted again 10 months after their loans were modified.

The adjacent table (at right) shows the same thing, only this time with homeowers who were seriously delinquent prior to loan mods. As you would imagine, their re-default rates 10 months after their loans were modified are considerably higher. These are often the people who could barely afford their home (or not at all).

What was significant was those who were not in default (i.e. current) prior to the rush to modify loans, whereby they then took up the offer to modify their loans to either lower their monthly payments or take advantage of lower rates - their subsequent default rates were exceptionally high as well.

The other point to note is that while the default rates are high, they are so because unemployment continued to rise over the last 9 months, and while there has been some recovery in house prices of late, for most of the year house prices has been dwindling down as well. Thus the default rates are understandable to a large extent.

What this shows is that as well intended as Obama's plans were to start with, it needs to be accompanied by a a substantive recovery in economic activity and employment for the plans to work well.

>

Loan Mods Default Rates

loan_-mods-20090710

>


p/s photos: Kim Hee Sun

Companies That Should Churn Out Condoms





















































If condoms had sponsors, you might find them packaged like these:

Monday, July 13, 2009

Can We Stop The 'Athth Kiththing' & Wasting of Resources

Important Posting To People In Power:

Flip open the daily papers, go and see how many activities by our politicians that can be considered as pure 'ego trips', involving the many 'athth-kiththers', doing numbingly silly PR exercises. Gone are the days when we need to be seen by the people, shake hands with your constituencies, kiss the babies, etc... these are all WASTEFUL ACTIVITIES, its a waste of talent, a waste of labour, a waste of time, and promotes the same diatribe of inefficient allocation of resources. It also pollutes our mindsets, sets our thinking and culture to a more ancient time. These are the things we expect to see in North Korea!

So, please spend more time to plan more effectively, solve problems, seek out ideas, test out viable options, seek to improve long term sustainability programs for the country. STOP walking around streets, shaking hands, holding meaningless jamuans so that so many can be bored shitless... drinking rose syrup and trying to keep awake listening to meaningless speeches. STOP all those "processions" that just take up so much resources in planning and attending to these activities. ( I can understand if it was an election year, but don't do that in non-election years la).

When I was in primary school, we were roped in to stand in the fucking sun for 3 hours so that we could wave the fucking flags of certain Commonwealth countries whose dignitaries were down for a visit or some conference. That is child abuse, that is a silly use of resources, that is the kind of 'show and tell' we need not do... you mean we still need to impress dignitaries?? Who are these people that needed throngs of people to wave to indicate their importance. What kind of EGOS they have??? Are these things really important? What kind of values are we telling our people??? ... Nobody asked us kids whether we wanted to do it, whether we wanted to show respect to those people. Its not a matter of being patriotic or not, I would like my country to grow up, be respectful of the dignity of each citizen. DO NOT do things that causes many people to have to "pander and kowtow" to these superficial activities.

If I was a high ranking official, I would say, ... please don't do the tea party, no rombongan, don't ask people to leave work halfway to line the streets ... in fact, forget about the fucking signing ceremony. I want my fellow Malaysians to do meaningful things and not be dragged to do useless, cluttering, shallow, perfunctory stuff. I want people to know my ego is small, and does not need polishing. I hope my fellow citizens would appreciate the work done and not the wayang kulit. Can we all just help one another to grow up, please!!??

I thought the subservient mentality had gone when the colonial powers left??!! Am I the only one who think this is not "right", can't we have a more egalitarian society??!!

The other thing which we MUST stop is the stupid congratulatory messages on datukships, this award, that award, etc... ITS A FUCKING WASTE OF RESOURCES. If I was Teh Hiong Piow, and I were to get another award, I would make fucking sure to announce to all who regard me as demi-God that: ... PLEASE NO MORE CONGRATULATORY MESSAGES, just send me a card or convert the money you were about to spend on advertising to give to a charity in my name or Public Bank's name, I would really prefer you to do that. Right now, there is only one beneficiary, the papers.

Can all the ministers please issue a statement to all companies that under no circumstances are companies or individuals allowed to offer "congratulatory messages" or "thank you messages" in paper adverts. Do you KNOW HOW MUCH WE WILL SAVE A YEAR??? One page is about RM20,000... lets say there are 5 pages of these type of messages a day = RM100,000 x 365 = RM36.5m ... and I am being very conservative here, and this is ONE PAPER. Take 4 newspapers = RM146m, imagine how many old folks home and orphanages we can maintain ... or hey, that is 973 fucking university scholarships worth RM150,000 a year that we can grant.

Its time that our leaders take the initiative to really "lead", lead us all to broaden our minds, lead us all to discard wasteful activities ... Better government, smaller government, smaller egos, less talk, more action, smarter thinking ...


p/s photo: Carrie Lee


Market Commentary



Just looking at the markets today, some may not know what to make of it. Its like uncertain and the energy is misplaced and incoherent. Looking at the leaders board, Konsort has raced up the volume list, the stock that links it up is Pelikan. They have a mutual substantial shareholder, look it up. There are talks that Pelikan is being planned for a MBO or a private equity buyout (part of the reason why I highlighted it as a buy below RM1.00). Both should be OK for a swift trade. Not encouraged, only for smart and savvy traders who can move in and out quick by looking at volume and trends.

The other thing one can surmise from the gainers is that the realignment caused by the "new" FTSE-KLCI 30 index, which I have highlighted as "very important". The adjustment process favours certain stocks which takes out some of their free float capacity. Hence look for firm support for Tanjong and Commerce.

Some strategic accumulation can be seen in IOI Corp, which looks to me to be a good base building level, or some "substantial shareholder" thinking that this is the "right levels" to accumulate strongly.
Fergetabout UEM Land or Tebrau, never liked their run up as the story is still wishy washy. No follow through, corporate plans all habuk, tarak api punya. I don't like many stocks now as I think markets do look tired, but if you point a gun to my head to force me to buy one stock to hold till rest of they year, I would probably say E&O.


p/s photos: Elanne Kong & Janice Man


Can Asian Markets Continue To Outperform The Rest - Revisited


Asian equity markets have outperformed mature markets in 2009 thanks to continuous foreign institutional investor (FII) inflows amid diminishing risk-aversion among global investors and some signs of green shoots in Asia. As of July 8 2009, MSCI Asia Pacific gained 11.6% ytd with China and Sri Lanka as the best performers, and Australia and New Zealand as the worst performers. Despite impressive improvements, downside risks remain due to bleak corporate earnings outlook, worries over the real economy and revival of any global risk aversion.

Trends
# 2009 MSCI Asia Pacific performance in USD terms: 11.6% ytd as of July 8, up 38.7% during March 2-July 8
# 2009 MSCI Asia performance in USD terms: 11.3% ytd as of July 8, up 38.0% during March 2-July 8
# 2009 MSCI Asia (ex Japan) performance in USD terms: 29.8% ytd as of July 8, up 57.1% during March 2-July 8
# Best performers (ytd as of July 8, 2009): China: 71.5% | Sri Lanka: 56.2% | Indonesia: 53.8% | Taiwan: 47.0% | India: 42.6% | Viet Nam: 41.4%
# Worst performers (ytd as of July 8, 2009): the Philippines: 30.1% | Singapore: 31.0% | Thailand: 29.3% | South Korea: 27.3% | Pakistan: 26.7% | Hong Kong: 23.7% | Malaysia: 21.6% | Japan: 4.9% | Australia: 1.1% | New Zealand: 1.0%
# In 2009: Asia's equity market (ex Japan) have outperformed mature markets, up 29.8% ytd as of July 8 2009, while the S&P 500 Index and the U.S. Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 5.6% and 9.5% respectively during the same period. Continuous FII inflows to Asian equity markets have taken net flows to a positive US$14.4 billion as of June 24 2009, significantly up from US$10.8 billion in H1 and US$9.6 billion in H2 2008.
# Since March 2009, Asian equity markets have witnessed a rally following a surge in U.S. markets and began to benefit from the widening valuation gap on the back of relatively resilient macroeconomic fundamentals. During the March 2- July 8 period, MSCI Asia (ex Japan) rose by 57.1%, significantly higher than the S&P 500 Index and the Dow Jones Industrial Average which gained 25.5% and 20.9% respectively.
# Valuations: Taiwanese shares are the most expensive in the region, 64.6 times reported earnings, followed by New Zealand (38.0x), China (33.1x for A-shares) and South Korea (32.1x). On the other hand, Singapore (12.1x) and Pakistan (9.7x) are cheapest when compared to their regional peers.
# 2008 Review: The peak-to-trough decline in Asian equities in 2008 (more than 70% for some markets) surpassed the 60% fall in local currency terms during the 1998 Asian financial crisis. Sustained outflows from offshore Asian funds took total net redemptions in Jan-Oct 2008 to a record high such that all money that flowed in during 2007 flowed out.
# Market Integration: There is a noticeable upward trend in the Asia-U.S. correlation with the correlation parameter picking up sharply in H2 2008 (peaking during mid-Oct 2008). However, average correlations for emerging Asian equity markets are generally higher between the region's markets than with U.S. markets.
# Government intervention: Several countries including Taiwan, Pakistan, Vietnam, Thailand intervened in the stock market by narrowing the trading band, introducing stabilization fund to contain volatility, banning short-selling, directing government funds to buy share.

Outlook
# Upsides: AXJ region is now attractively valued, and buying into most of the region's equity markets seems a better bet than bonds amid increasing bond issuance. Also, as of end April 2009, market capitalization of Asian Pacific markets ($10.2tn) has come ahead of that of European markets ($9.3tn, including Africa and the Middle East) as Asian stock prices sour at a faster pace than European ones.
# Downsides: Goomy earnings forecasts, worries over the U.S. economy, exit by local investors and also FIIs alarmed at greater than expected impact of global slowdown on Asia's growth, exports, fiscal deficits, slowing consumer spending and investment may have negative impacts. Investors may move money to bond markets from equity markets in an anticipation of slower global economy's recovery due to the spread of swine flu. High (external) debt exposure of corporate sector in some countries and risks of real estate correction and bank profitability are additional risks.
# Given decreasing inflationary pressures and relatively healthy fiscal positions, further fiscal and monetary stimulus policies by Asian governments will able to boost the region's equity markets in H2 2009.
# Prospects for further inflows into Asian equities remain substantial, as global portfolio continue to adjust from relatively underweight positions, and given cheap equity valuations relative to bonds.
# Asian stocks have yet to reflect expectations for a powerful, synchronized recovery in the global economy as markets are still bearish on global growth and on emerging markets growth.
# Markets would likely grind higher first, before dropping by 20-30%: Catalysts for a correction are (1) flattening improvements in second derivatives; (2) softer than expected data coming out of China and; (3) a US% rally, which takes liquidity out of Asia ex.
# The recent rally in Asian equity markets might not continue due to still-weak real economic condition in many countries and the region's ultimate reliance on exports to the U.S. and EU, which means that financial-investor sentiment will remain susceptible to economic setbacks in those markets.


p/s photos: Meisa Kuroki

Sunday, July 12, 2009

Susilo Ensures More Stability & Better Economic Prospects


# July 8: Exit polls show that current President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono won the Presidential elections by winning twice as many votes as his competitors. Yudhoyono got over 60.9% of votes which gives him the majority count to defeat the two opponents and lead to a single-round victory. Indonesia held its second direct election after ending the authoritarian rule. His competitors included former President Megawati Sukarnoputri and the President's deputy Jusuf Kalla who won over 25% and 12% of votes respectively.
# Yudhoyono's win will seal political stability and will be a positive for the booming equity and currency markets. He has selected Boediono (the former central bank governor) as his running mate, raising credibility in running credible macroeconomic policies. Improving regulation, reforming labor laws and tax policies to raise foreign investment will be his challenges. Continuing with his anti-corruption and anti-extremism approach, and targeted policies for the poor will also boost investor sentiment.
# Given Yudoyono's Democratic party's majority win in April 2009 Parliamentary elections, he will have enough support to implement policies. President Yodhoyono's Democratic Party won over 20% seats in the April 2009 Parliamentary elections which is enough to nominate Yodhoyono as the Presidential candidate without forming a coalition. Parties had to secure at least 20% of seats in the House of People's Representatives (DPR, the legislature) or 25% of the vote to be eligible to nominate presidential candidates for election in July 2009.
# Factors benefiting Yudoyono: Under Yudoyono's rule, GDP growth has risen from 5% in 2004 to 6.5% in 2008 which has benefited job growth and consumer spending. Indonesia is among the few Asian countries to avoid a recession in 2009 and having strong domestic demand. Capital inflows into stock and debt market have boosted these asset markets and raised investment. FDI has improved. Resource sectors and rural incomes have benefited from the recent commodity boom. Government has used fiscal stimulus measures (tax incentive for firms, spending on infrastructure, public services, job creation) to reduce impact of recession on the economy and job losses. Government cut fuel prices in January 2009 and has offered targeted financial support for the poor. The ruling party and President Yudhoyono have encouraged a democratic and secular system and tried to reduce extremism and violence. Yudhoyono has also helped reduce corruption.
# Reform challenges: Foreign investment in resource based sectors has been a point of debate due to impact on poor and social implications. Domestic and foreign investment is also deterred by regulations and red tape, poor infrastructure and investor protection, especially in commodity sectors. This has constrained the much needed foreign investment and technology transfer to develop the commodity sector. Labor laws have led to high structural unemployment and deterred investors. Tax system is also a negative for investors. Fuel subsidies burden the fiscal deficit.
# Indonesia has the potential to achieve higher growth rates provided Yudhoyono emerges with a strong mandate to cut regulations that hinder companies and investment.
# The election has helped consolidate democracy in Indonesia. Yudhoyono and his Democratic Party (PD) is the strongest force in parliament. This will deepen and quicken the pace of reforms and help Indonesia attain higher growth.
# Yudhoyono is considered positive for business and foreign investment, partly on perception of anti-corruption strategy and tendency to appoint qualified policymakers.
# Reform expectations could prove unrealistic. The PD will still require the support of other parties to pass legislation, ensuring that policy-making frustrations will persist during Yudhoyono's second term. Yudhoyono has pledged to double infrastructure spending, privatize state-owned companies and improve Indonesia's attractiveness to foreign investors, which can raise Indonesia's medium- and long-term growth. This will also require additional investments in infrastructure, curtailing corruption and bureaucracy, regulatory reform and stabilization of the currency markets.
# The result of presidential elections will not be a big event for the market as the market-friendly incumbent was expected to return. Nevertheless, removing political uncertainty will further boost capital inflows.
# Yodhoyono seems to have made the best of the tools at his disposal. Small fiscal deficit can provide more fiscal stimulus. Strong private consumption, buoyed by tax cuts and handouts, supported GDP growth in Q1 2009. Rupiah, appreciated against the U.S. dollar since November 2008, has been steadied by various stand-by-loans and currency swap agreement. Stock market has boomed in 2009.
# Golkar and PDIP parties might unify and pose challenge to Yudhoyono, not in the presidential race, but as a challenging opposition to legislative reforms in parliament.
# As long as Indonesia continues to be led by secular parties and leaders who do not pose threat to ethnic minorities (e.g. Chinese business establishment), the investor community is unlikely to be concerned.


p/s photos: Pace Wu Pei Ci

Saturday, July 11, 2009

Xinjiang Oil Boom Ignites Uighur Unrest


This was an prescient article by Jamil Anderlini in Korla, Xinjiang, published: August 28 2008 in The Financial Times.

“Offer energy resources as tribute [to Beijing] to create harmony” proclaims a giant billboard outside a petrol station in Korla, in China’s restive western frontier region of Xinjiang.

The increasing importance of the Muslim-dominated Xinjiang autonomous region as a source of the energy and minerals needed to fuel China’s booming eastern cities is raising the stakes for Beijing in its battle against separatists agitating for an independent state.

Unequal rights: in spite of affirmative action programmes, any jobs in the region that wield any real power are held by Han Chinese, who now make up 70 per cent of its population

“The Chinese didn’t want to let Xinjiang be independent before, but after they built all the oilfields, it became absolutely impossible,” said one Muslim resident in Korla, who asked not to be named for fear of retribution by government security agents.

The desert around the city is punctuated every kilometre or two by oil and gas derricks, each of them topped with the red Chinese national flag, an assertion of sovereignty over every inch of the energy-rich ground.

Korla itself is an important junction on the 4,200km-long west-east gas pipeline that carries natural gas from Xinjiang to Shanghai.

A brand new airport, high-rise office blocks and scores of new apartment complexes are proof that the city is reaping the fruits of an energy boom that has seen annual natural gas production in the surrounding Tarim Basin increase 20 times between 2000 and 2007. But the vast majority of profits from the industry are sent back east, along with the oil and gas.

In 2005, Xinjiang’s local government was allotted only Rmb240m ($35m, €24m, £19m) out of the Rmb14.8bn in tax revenue from the petrochemical industries that are based in the region.

In Korla, the oil industry is under the control of a subsidiary of PetroChina, the state-owned energy giant, which answers directly to its head office in Beijing.

“We don’t have the power to tell them to do anything – they only listen to their bosses in Beijing,” said one local government official who asked not to be named.

Many of Korla’s original Uighur residents feel they have missed out altogether on the few benefits that have trickled down to the region from the rapid extraction of its energy resources.

Mineral exploration began in the Tarim Basin at the start of last century but it was not until 1958, nearly a decade after the Chinese Communist revolution and the re-conquest of Xinjiang, that the first oilfield went into production.

At that time Uighurs, a Muslim Turkic people with stronger links to central Asia than the rest of China, were the only inhabitants. Today, Han Chinese from central and eastern provinces make up 70 per cent of the population in Korla.

“A lot of Uighurs say this whole area used to belong to them, and now they are strangers in their own home,” said Xie, a shopkeeper whose parents were sent out to Korla from their native Hunan province in the 1950s to work in a bomb-making factory for the People’s Liberation Army. “Some of them are very angry and they’re causing more and more trouble these days.”

Uighur resentment has been exacerbated by a massive security operation timed to coincide with the Olympic and Paralympic Games period. Under the auspices of ensuring a “peaceful Olympics”, the government has set up roadblocks and security checks and dispatched armed street patrols, all of which has failed to stop a number of attacks by suspected separatists in recent weeks that have left more than 30 dead. Two policemen were killed on Thursday in a clash with armed Uighurs.

At a checkpoint outside Korla, “wanted” posters display the mugshots and personal details of 11 Uighurs, some as young as 17, who are being pursued for the crime of selling banned literature, including DVDs and books on the creation of an Islamic state.

Amnesty International says Xinjiang is the only part of China where people are regularly executed for political offences.

“There are a lot of people who want Xinjiang to be independent of China but we personally don’t even dare think those thoughts,” said one Uighur in Korla when asked what he thought of the separatist cause.

On Petrochemical Boulevard, the main street in Korla, the only visible Uighurs are street cleaners and the odd waiter hanging out in the doorway of a Muslim restaurant.

Locals say Uighurs are sometimes given low-level jobs in the oilfields, but there are none in management positions in Korla. In spite of affirmative action programmes that reserve a proportion of official posts for minority groups, all government and military positions with any real power are held by Han Chinese.

PetroChina and its Korla subsidiary refused to be interviewed, but one former employee said discrimination was rife within the company.

“There used to be two Uighurs driving for the oil company here,” said this former employee, who asked to be known only by his surname, Ma. “But they were moved to a different work unit because the bosses think Muslims are all terrorists and separatists.”


p/s photos: Macy Chan



Tengku Razaleigh's Speech




Najib’s First 100 Days

Public Relations Consultants Malaysia

“Straight Talk”

8pm July 10, 2009

HELP University College

by Tengku Razaleigh


1. Thank you for inviting me to address you. It’s a pleasure to be here, and to learn from you. You have asked me to talk about Najib’s First 100 Days, and this lecture is in a series called Straight Talk. I shall indeed speak plainly and directly.
2. Let me begin by disappointing you. I am not going to talk about Najib’s First 100 Days because it makes little sense to do so.
3. Our governments are brought to power for five year terms through general elections. The present government was constituted after March 8, 2008 and Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak’s tenure as Prime Minister resulted from a so-called “smooth transfer of power” between the previous Prime Minister and himself that took a somewhat unsmooth twelve months to carry out. During those months, Najib took on the de facto leadership role domestically while Abdullah warmed our international ties. The first 100 days of this government went by unremarked sometime in June last year.
4. Not only is it somewhat meaningless to talk about Najib’s First 100 days, such talk buys into a kind of political silliness that we are already too prone to. It has us imagine that the present government started work on April 2 and forget that it commenced work on March 8 last year and must be accountable for all that has been done or not done since then. It has us forget that in our system of parliamentary, constitutional democracy, governments are brought to power at general elections and must be held accountable for promises made at these elections. It leads us to forget that these promises, set out in election manifestos, are undertaken by political parties, not individuals, and are not trifles to be forgotten when there is a change of individual.
5. It is important that we remember these things, cultivate a more critical recollection of them, and learn to hold our leaders accountable to them, so that we are not perpetually chasing the slogan of the day, whether this be Vision 2020, Islam Hadhari or 1Malaysia. As PR Professionals, you would see my point immediately. Slogans without substance undermine trust. That substance is made up of policies that have been thought through and are followed through. That substance is concrete and provided by results we can measure.
6. Whether or not some of our leaders are ready for it, we are maturing as a democracy. We are beginning to evaluate our governments more by the results they deliver over time than by their rhetoric. As our increasingly well-educated and well-travelled citizens apply this standard, they force our politicians to think before they speak, and deliver before they speak again. As thinking Malaysians we should look for the policies, if any, behind the slogans. What policies are still in place and which have we abandoned? What counts as policy and who is consulted when it is made? How is a proposal formulated and specified and approved before it becomes policy, and by whom? What are the roles of party, cabinet, King and Parliament in this process? Must we know what it means before it is instituted or do we have to piece it together with guesswork? Do we even have a policy process?
7. The mandate Najib has taken up is the one given to Barisan Nasional under Abdullah Badawi’s leadership. BN was returned to power in the 12th General Elections on a manifesto promising Security, Peace and Prosperity. It is this manifesto against which the present administration undertook to be judged. The present government inherits projects and policies such as Islam Hadhari and Vision 2020. If these are still in place, how do they relate to each other and to 1 Malaysia? How do we evaluate the latest slogan against the fact of constitutional failure in Perak, the stench of corruption in the PKFZ project and reports of declining media freedom? What do we make of cynical political plays on racial unity against assurances that national unity is the priority?
8. It is not amiss to ask about continuity. We were told that the reason why we had to have a yearlong ‘transfer of power’ to replace the previous Prime Minster was so that we could have such policy continuity. The issues before the present BN government are not transformed overnight with a change of the man at the top.
9. Let me touch on one issue every Malaysian is concerned with: security. The present government made the right move in supporting the establishment of the Royal Commission to Enhance the Operations and Management of the Police in 2004. Responding to the recommendations of the Royal Commission, the government allocated the PDRM RM8 billion to upgrade itself under the 9th Malaysia Plan, a tripling of their allocation under the 8th Malaysia Plan.
10. Despite the huge extra amounts we are spending on policing, there has been no dent on our crime problem, especially in the Johor Bahru area, where it continues to make a mockery of our attempts to develop Iskandar as a destination for talent and investment. Despite spending all this money, we have just been identified as a major destination for human trafficking by the US State Department’s 2008 Human Rights Watch. We are now in the peer group of Sudan, Saudi Arabia and North Korea for human trafficking. All over the world the organized cross-border activity of human trafficking feeds on the collusion of crime syndicates and corrupt law enforcement and border security officials. Security is about more than just catching the criminals out there. It is also about the integrity of our own people and processes. It is above all about uprooting corruption and malpractice in government agencies, especially in law enforcement agencies. I wish the government were as eager to face the painful challenge of reform as to spend money. The key recommendation of the Royal Commission was the formation of an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission. That has been shelved.
11. Royal Commissions and their findings are not to be trifled with and applied selectively. Their findings and recommendations are conveyed in a report submitted to the King, who then transmits them to the Government. Their recommendations have the status of instructions from the King. The recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Police have not been properly implemented. The Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Lingam Video clip might as well not have been conducted, because its findings have been completely ignored. Both Commissions investigated matters fundamental to law and order in this country: the capability and integrity of the police and of the judiciary. No amount of money thrown at the PDRM or on installing CCTV’s can make up for what happens to our security when our law enforcers and our judges are compromised.
12. Two Royal Commissions undertaken under the present government unearthed deep issues in the police and the judiciary and made recommendations with the King’s authority behind them, and they have been ignored. The public may wonder if the government is committed to peace and security if it cannot or will not address institutional rot in law enforcement and the rule of law.
13. The reform of the police and the judiciary has been on the present government’s To Do list for more than five years.
14. I want to reflect now upon where we stand today and how we might move forward. We are truly at a turning point in our history. Our political landscape is marked with unprecedented uncertainty. Nobody knows what the immediate future holds for us politically. This is something very new for Malaysians. The inevitability of a strong BN government figured into all political and economic calculations and provided a kind of stability to our expectations. Now that this is gone, and perhaps gone for good, we need a new basis for long-term confidence. No matter who wins the next General Election, it is likely to be with a slim majority. Whatever uncertainty we now face is likely to persist unless some sort of tiebreaker is found which gathers the overwhelming support of the people.
15. We need to trust less in personalities and more in policies, look less to politics and more to principle, less to rhetoric and more to tangible outcomes, less to the government of the day and more to enduring institutions, first among which must be the Federal Constitution.
16. We need an unprecedented degree of openness and honesty about what our issues are and what can be done; about who we are, and where we want to go. We need straight talk rather than slogans. We need to be looking the long horizon rather than occupying ourselves with media-generated milestones.
17. Those of us who think about the future of Malaysia have never been so restless. The mould of our past is broken, and there is no putting it back together again, but a new mould into which to pour our efforts is not yet cast. This is a time to think new thoughts, and to be courageous in articulating them.
18. Such is the case not just in politics but also in how the government manages the economy. In a previous speech I argued that for our economy to escape the “middle income trap” we need to make a developmental leap involving transformative improvements in governance and a successful reform of our political system. I said the world recession is a critical opportunity for us to re-gear and re-tool the Malaysian economy because it is a challenge to take bold, imaginative measures. We must make that leap or remain stuck as low achievers who were once promising.
19. We are in a foundational crisis both of our politics and of our economy. In both dimensions, the set plays of the past have taken us as far as they can, and can take us no further. Politically and economically, we have arrived at the end of the road for an old way of managing things. The next step facing us is not a step but a leap, not an addition to what we have but a shift that changes the very ground we play on.
20. This is not the first time in our brief history as an independent nation that we have found ourselves at an impasse and come up with a ground-setting policy, a new framework, a leap into the future. The race riots of 1969 ended the political accommodation and style of the first era of our independence. Parliament was suspended and a National Operations Council put in place under the leadership of the late Tun Razak. He formed a National Consultative Council to study what needed to be done. The NCC was a non-partisan body which included everyone. It was the NCC that drafted and recommended the New Economic Policy. This was approved and implemented by the Government.
21. The NEP was a twenty year programme. It had a national, and not a racial agenda to eradicate poverty and address structural inequality in the form of the identification of race with occupation. It aimed to remove a colonial era distribution of economic roles in our economy. Nowhere in its terms is any race specified, nor does it privilege one race over another. Its aim was unity.
22. The NEP’s redistributive measures drew on principles of social justice, not claims of racial privilege. This is an important point. The NEP was acceptable to all Malaysians because its justification was universal rather than sectarian, ethical rather than opportunistic. It appealed to Malaysians’ sense of social justice and not to any notion of racial privilege.
23. We were devising a time-limited policy for the day, in pursuit of a set of measurable outcomes. We were not devising a doctrine for an eternal socio-economic arrangement. Like all policies, it was formulated to solve a finite set of problems, but through an enduring concern with principles such as equity and justice. I happen to think it was the right thing for the time, and it worked in large measure.
24. Curiously, although the policy was formulated within the broad consensus of the NCC for a finite period, in our political consciousness it has grown into an all-encompassing and permanent framework that defines who we are. We continue to act and talk as if it is still in place. The NEP ended in 1991 when it was terminated and replaced by the New Development Policy, but eighteen years on, we are still in its hangover and speak confusingly about liberalizing it. The NEP was necessary and even visionary in 1971, but it is a crushing indictment of our lack of imagination, of the mediocrity of our leadership, that two decades after its expiry, we talk as if it is the sacrosanct centre of our socio-political arrangement, and that departures from it are big strides. The NEP is over, and we have not had the courage to tell people this. The real issue is not whether the NEP is to be continued or not, but whether we have the imagination to come up with something which better serves our values and objectives, for our own time.
25. Policies are limited mechanisms for solving problems. They become vehicles for abuse when they stay on past their useful life. Like political or corporate leaders who have stayed too long, policies that overrun their scope or time become entrenched in abuse, and confuse the means that they are with the ends that they were meant to serve. The NEP was formulated to serve the objective of unity. That objective is enduring, but its instrument can come up for renewal or replacement. Any organisation, let alone a country, that fails to renew a key policy over forty years in a fast-moving world is out of touch and in trouble.
26. There is a broad consensus in our society that while the NEP has had important successes, it has now degenerated into a vehicle for abuse and inefficiency. Neither the Malays nor the non-Malays approve of the way it now works, although there would be multiracial support for the objectives of the NEP, as originally understood. The enthusiasm with which recent reforms have been greeted in the business and international communities suggests that the NEP is viewed as an obstacle to growth. This was not what it was meant to be.
27. It was designed to promote a more equitable and therefore a more harmonious society. Far from obstructing growth, the stability and harmony envisaged by the NEP would were to be the basis for long term prosperity.
28. Over the years, however, and alongside its successes, the NEP has been systematically appropriated by a small political and business class to enrich itself and perpetuate its power. This process has corrupted our society and our politics. It has corrupted our political parties. Rent-seeking practices have choked the NEP’s original intention of seeking a more just and equitable society, and have discredited the broad nation-building enterprise which this policy was meant to serve.
29. Thus, while the NEP itself has expired, we live under the hangover of a policy which has been skewed from its intent. Instead of coming up with better policy tools in pursuit of the aims behind the NEP, a set of vested interests rallies to defend the mere form of the NEP and to extend its bureaucratic sway through a huge apparatus of commissions, agencies, licenses and permits while its spirit has been evacuated. In doing so they have clouded the noble aims of the NEP and racialized its originally national and universal concerns.
30. We must break the stranglehold of communal politics and racial policy if we want to be a place where an economy driven by ideas and skills can flourish. This is where our daunting economic and political challenges can be addressed in one stroke. We can do much better than cling to the bright ideas of forty years ago as if they were dogma, and forget our duty to come up with the bright ideas for our own time. The NEP, together with the Barisan coalition, was a workable solution for Malaysia forty years ago. But forty years ago, our population was about a third of what it is today, our economy was a fraction the size and complexity that it is now, and structured around the export of tin and rubber rather than around manufacturing, services and oil and gas. Forty years ago we were in the midst of the Cold War, and the Vietnam War raged to the north. Need I say we live in a very different world today. We need to talk to the facebook generation of young Malaysians connected to global styles and currents of thought. We face global epidemics, economic downturns and planetary climate change.
31. We can do much better than to cling to the outer form of an old policy. Thinking in these terms only gives us the negative policy lever of “relaxing” certain rules, when what we need is a new policy framework, with 21st century policy instruments. We have relaxed some quotas. We have left Approved Permits and our taxi licensing system intact. We have left the apparatus of the NEP, and a divisive mindset that has grown up around it, in place. Wary of well-intentioned statements with no follow-through, the business community has greeted these reforms cautiously, noting that a mountain of other reforms are needed. One banker was quoted in a recent news article as saying: "All the reforms need to go hand in hand..Why is there an exodus of talent and wealth? It is because people do not feel confident with the investment climate, security conditions and the government in Malaysia. Right now, many have lost faith in the system."
32. The issues are intertwined. Our problems are systemic and rooted in the capability of the government to deliver, and the integrity of our institutions. It is clear that piecemeal “liberalization” and measure by measure reform on a politicized timetable is not going to do the job.
33. What we need is a whole new policy framework, based on a comprehensive vision that addresses root problems in security, institutional integrity, education and government capability. What we need to do is address our crisis with the bold statecraft from which the NEP itself originated, not cling to a problematic framework that does little justice to our high aspirations. The challenge of leadership is to tell the truth about our situation, no matter how unpalatable, to bring people together around that solution, and to move them to act together on that solution.
34. If the problem is really that we face a foundational crisis, then it is not liberalization of the NEP, or even liberalization per se that we need. From the depths of the global economic slowdown it is abundantly clear that the autonomous free market is neither equitable nor even sustainable. There is no substitute for putting our heads together and coming up with wise policy. We need a Malaysian New Deal based on the same universal concerns on which the NEP was originally formulated but designed for a new era: we must continue to eradicate poverty without regard for race or religion, and ensure that markets serve the people rather than the other way around.
35. Building on the desire for unity based social justice that motivated the NEP in 1971, let us assist 100% of Malaysians who need help in improving their livelihoods and educating their children. We want the full participation of all stakeholders in our economy. A fair and equitable political and economic order, founded on equal citizenship as guaranteed in our Constitution, is the only possible basis for a united Malaysia and a prerequisite of the competitive, talent-driven economy we must create if we are to make our economic leap.
36. If we could do this, we would restore national confidence, we would bring Malaysians together in common cause to build a country that all feel a deep sense of belonging to. We would unleash the kind of investment we need, not just of foreign capital but of the loyalty, effort and commitment of all Malaysians.
37. I don't know about you. I am embarrassed that after fifty years of independence we are still talking about bringing Malaysians together. I would have wished that by now, and here tonight, we could be talking about how we can conquer new challenges together.



Usain Bolt's Records Will Stand For A Few Decades

Its hard not to marvel at Usain Bolt. He literally blows the current crop of competitors away. For a 100m race, the winning margin is usually in hundreds of fraction of a second. If you thought his Olympics win was astounding, and it was, his performance in the rain last night was astonishing. The commentators here noted that Bolt ran the first 100m of that race in 9.9 seconds.

Last night, Bolt was due to run in the 200m in Lausanne, and much hype surrounded the race. So you can imagine that when the heavens opened and it poured with rain before and during the meeting, people's expectations were dampened somewhat.

The men's 100m was won in 10.07s - a relatively slow time. The women's 100m was taken in 11.03 - good, but not spectacular. It was not a fast night for sprinting, and quality athletes all seemed down by a couple of percent on their normal times. And when the wind picked up, Bolt was faced with a headwind, it would have been quite acceptable to run anything around 20 seconds.

But Bolt unleashed a 19.59s time, which is absolutely extra-ordinary, running into a headwind of 0.9m/s in wet conditions. His margin of victory was 0.82 seconds, over LaShawn Merrit, the Olympic 400m champion, with other Olympic finallists (medallists among them) trailing even further behind.













The gap to second is an amazing 4.2%, which is the equivalent of first and second being separated by almost 5 seconds in an 800m race! Of course, that never happens because of pacing and race strategy, but it's an incredible margin of victory over a decent quality field.

About a month ago, Tyson Gay laid down his marker when he ran 19.58 seconds in New York. That still stands as the fastest time in the world this year, and so on paper, anyway, Gay and Bolt have a great duel lined up in Berlin later this year.

But on the track, and in the rain, Bolt more than matched Gay's performance. There seems little that Bolt cannot do, barring injury, and on the right day, his own world record of 19.30s seems fragile. Considering that only a year ago the 19.32s of Michael Johnson was the most "unbreakable record" in track, Bolt has certainly moved the sport forward a few generations.

Friday, July 10, 2009

China's Lending Explosion


Is there anything wrong with China's lending spree. The central bank basically "advised" banks to ratchet up their lending, and the banks followed dutifully for the past couple of quarters with amazing results.


First of all, you cannot suddenly find so many attractive "borrowers" to lend aggressively to. Secondly, not many will say no when you offer to lend them money.


To be fair, this strategy pulled the domestic economy from falling further along with the ill effects of a global economy in crisis, but at what price. As I have mentioned before, this has to play itself out, and will not result in a sudden correction in property or stock prices in China. The liquidity rush will soon find its way into higher equity prices in China (hence bullish for the rest of the year for Chinese equity), and some may trickle back into Chinese property mart as well. Brace for high default rates when the music stops, probably after Chinese New Year in 2010.


China’s new lending more than doubled in June from a month earlier, increasing concerns bad loans and asset bubbles will emerge amid a credit boom.


New lending was 1.53 trillion yuan ($224 billion), the central bank said on its Web site today, bringing total lending this year to 7.4 trillion yuan. The calculation for new loans is preliminary, the central bank added.


The government is countering an export collapse by flooding the economy with money to fuel domestic demand. Rapid credit growth poses a risk to the nation’s lenders and a concentration of credit in some industries and businesses may damage the stability of the financial system, the banking regulator said yesterday.


Excess liquidity is fueling speculation and that means asset bubbles and wasteful investment. Already China recently failed to complete a $4.1bn auction of one-year government bonds, which suggested that investors are positioning for higher inflation caused by the credit surge.


Just something more to chew on, in 2005 Ernst & Young published a survey estimating that the bad loans in the Chinese banking system equaled close to $900 billion. Since then there has been enormous speculation in both the stock and real estate market. The average urban residential property prices fell by 15 to 30 per cent over the next two years from their levels at the end of 2008. Of course, by the end of 2008 they had already fallen from there 2007 highs. You cannot have real estate fall that much without having bad loans. Here is the juicy part, according to the prospectus for the Commercial Bank of China, it is illegal in China to foreclose on residential property.So what are bad loans? Bad loans = immediate write downs? No, they are then carried as what??? ... long term assets???
The reality is that no one knows exactly how bad the situation is in any bank. Information has value and is not disclosed unless required by law or for consideration. Since the banks in China are owned by the state, there is no legal requirement.


Something's gotta give ... but let's have a bull run first...


p/s photos: Elanne Kong Yuk Lam



How To Do Bribery by Siemens AG


Reinhard Siekaczek a stout, graying former accountant for Siemens AG, the German engineering giant, knew that his secret life had ended. "I know what this is about," Mr. Siekaczek told the officers crowded around his door. "I have been expecting you."

To understand how Siemens, one of the world's biggest companies, last week ended up paying $1.6 billion in the largest fine for bribery in modern corporate history, it's worth delving into Mr. Siekaczek's unusual journey. A former midlevel executive at Siemens, he was one of several people who arranged a torrent of payments that eventually streamed to well-placed officials around the globe, from Vietnam to Venezuela and from Italy to Israel, according to interviews with Mr. Siekaczek and court records in Germany and the United States.


What is striking about Mr. Siekaczek's and prosecutors' accounts of those dealings, which flowed through a web of secret bank accounts and shadowy consultants, is how entrenched corruption had become at a sprawling, sophisticated corporation that externally embraced the nostrums of a transparent global marketplace built on legitimate transactions.


Mr. Siekaczek says that from 2002 to 2006 he oversaw an annual bribery budget of about $40 million to $50 million at Siemens. Company managers and sales staff used the slush fund to cozy up to corrupt government officials worldwide. The payments, he says, were vital to maintaining the competitiveness of Siemens overseas, particularly in his subsidiary, which sold telecommunications equipment. "It was about keeping the business unit alive and not jeopardizing thousands of jobs overnight," he said in an interview.


Siemens is hardly the only corporate giant caught in prosecutors' cross hairs. Three decades after Congress passed a law barring American companies from paying bribes to secure foreign business, law enforcement authorities around the world are bearing down on major enterprises like Daimler and Johnson & Johnson, with scores of cases now under investigation. Both companies declined comment, citing continuing investigations.


But the Siemens case is notable for its breadth, the sums of money involved, and the raw organizational zeal with which the company deployed bribes to secure contracts. It is also a model of something that was once extremely rare: cross-border cooperation among law enforcement officials.

Reinhard Siekaczek

Reinhard Siekaczek


German prosecutors initially opened the Siemens case in 2005. American authorities became involved in 2006 because the company's shares are traded on the New York Stock Exchange.


In its settlement last week with the Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission, Siemens pleaded guilty to violating accounting provisions of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which outlaws bribery abroad.


Although court documents are salted throughout with the word "bribes," the Justice Department allowed Siemens to plead to accounting violations because it cooperated with the investigation and because pleading to bribery violations would have barred Siemens from bidding on government contracts in the United States. Siemens doesn't dispute the government's account of its actions.


Matthew W. Friedrich, the acting chief of the Justice Department's criminal division, called corruption at Siemens "systematic and widespread." Linda C. Thomsen, the S.E.C.'s enforcement director, said it was "egregious and brazen." Joseph Persichini Jr., the director of the F.B.I.'s Washington field office, which led the investigation, called it "massive, willful and carefully orchestrated."


Mr. Siekaczek's telecommunications unit was awash in easy money. It paid $5 million in bribes to win a mobile phone contract in Bangladesh, to the son of the prime minister at the time and other senior officials, according to court documents. Mr. Siekaczek's group also made $12.7 million in payments to senior officials in Nigeria for government contracts.


In Argentina, a different Siemens subsidiary paid at least $40 million in bribes to win a $1 billion contract to produce national identity cards. In Israel, the company provided $20 million to senior government officials to build power plants. In Venezuela, it was $16 million for urban rail lines. In China, $14 million for medical equipment. And in Iraq, $1.7 million to Saddam Hussein and his cronies.


The bribes left behind angry competitors who were shut out of contracts and local residents in poor countries who, because of rigged deals, paid too much for necessities like roads, power plants and hospitals, prosecutors said.



Because government contracting is an opaque process and losers don't typically file formal protests, it's difficult to know the identity of competitors who lost out to Siemens. Companies in the United States have long complained, however, that they face an uneven playing field competing overseas. All told, Siemens will pay more than $2.6 billion to clear its name: $1.6 billion in fines and fees in Germany and the United States and more than $1 billion for internal investigations and reforms.


Ben W. Heineman Jr., a former general counsel at General Electric and a member of the American chapter of Transparency International, a nonprofit group that tracks corruption, says the enforcement of some antibribery conventions still remains scattershot. "Until you have energetic enforcement by the developed-world nations, you won't get strong antibribery programs or high-integrity corporate culture," he said.


Afghanistan, Haiti, Iraq, Myanmar and Somalia are the five countries where corporate bribery is most common, according to Transparency International. The S.E.C. complaint said Siemens paid its heftiest bribes in China, Russia, Argentina, Israel and Venezuela.


Mr. Siekaczek, who cooperated with German authorities after his arrest in 2006, has already been sentenced in Germany to two years' probation and a $150,000 fine. During a lengthy interview in Munich, a few blocks from the Siemens world headquarters, he provided an insider's account of corruption at the company. The interview was his first with English-language news outlets. "I would never have thought I'd go to jail for my company," Mr. Siekaczek said. "Sure, we joked about it, but we thought if our actions ever came to light, we'd all go together and there would be enough people to play a game of cards."


Mr. Siekaczek isn't a stereotype of a white-collar villain. There are no Ferraris in his driveway, or villas in Monaco. He dresses in jeans, loafers and leather jackets. With white hair and gold-rimmed glasses, he passes for a kindly grandfather -- albeit one who can discuss the advantages of offshore bank accounts as easily as last night's soccer match.


Siemens began bribing long before Mr. Siekaczek applied his accounting skills to the task of organizing the payments. World War II left the company shattered, its factories bombed and its trademark patents confiscated, according to American prosecutors. The company turned to markets in less developed countries to compete, and bribery became a reliable and ubiquitous sales technique.

"Bribery was Siemens's business model," said Uwe Dolata, the spokesman for the association of federal criminal investigators in Germany. "Siemens had institutionalized corruption." Before 1999, bribes were deductible as business expenses under the German tax code, and paying off a foreign official was not a criminal offense.


In such an environment, Siemens officials subscribed to a straightforward rule in pursuing business abroad, according to one former executive. They played by local rules.


Inside Siemens, bribes were referred to as "NA" -- a German abbreviation for the phrase "nutzliche Aufwendungen," which means "useful money." Siemens bribed wherever executives felt the money was needed, paying off officials not only in countries known for government corruption, like Nigeria, but also in countries with reputations for transparency, like Norway, according to court records.



In February 1999, Germany joined the international convention banning foreign bribery, a pact signed by most of the world's industrial nations. By 2000, authorities in Austria and Switzerland were suspicious of millions of dollars of Siemens payments flowing to offshore bank accounts, according to court records.


Rather than comply with the law, Siemens managers created a "paper program," a toothless internal system that did little to punish wrongdoers, according to court documents.


Mr. Siekaczek's business unit was one of the most egregious offenders. Court documents show that the telecommunications unit paid more than $800 million of the $1.4 billion in illegal payments that Siemens made from 2001 to 2007. Managers in the telecommunications group decided to deal with the possibility of a crackdown by making its bribery procedures more difficult to detect.


So, on one winter evening in late 2002, five executives from the telecommunications group met for dinner at a traditional Bavarian restaurant in a Munich suburb. Surrounded by dark wood panels and posters celebrating German engineering, the group discussed how to better disguise its payments, while making sure that employees didn't pocket the money, Mr. Siekaczek said.


To handle the business side of bribery, the executives turned to Mr. Siekaczek, a man renowned within the company for his personal honesty, his deep company loyalty -- and his experiences in the shadowy world of illegal bribery.


"It had nothing to do with being law-abiding, because we all knew what we did was unlawful." Mr. Siekaczek said. "What mattered here was that the person put in charge was stable and wouldn't go astray."


Although Mr. Siekaczek was reluctant to take the job offered that night, he justified it as economic necessity. If Siemens didn't pay bribes, it would lose contracts and its employees might lose their jobs.


"We thought we had to do it," Mr. Siekaczek said. "Otherwise, we'd ruin the company."


Indeed, he considers his personal probity a point of honor. He describes himself as "the man in the middle," "the banker" or, with tongue in cheek, "the master of disaster." But, he said, he never set up a bribe. Nor did he directly hand over money to a corrupt official.


German prosecutors say they have no evidence that he personally enriched himself, though German documents show that Mr. Siekaczek oversaw the transfer of some $65 million through hard-to-trace offshore bank accounts.


"I was not the man responsible for bribery," he said. "I organized the cash."


Mr. Siekaczek set things in motion by moving money out of accounts in Austria to Liechtenstein and Switzerland, where bank secrecy laws provided greater cover and anonymity. He said he also reached out to a trustee in Switzerland who set up front companies to conceal money trails from Siemens to offshore bank accounts in Dubai and the British Virgin Islands.


Each year, Mr. Siekaczek said, managers in his unit set aside a budget of about $40 million to $50 million for the payment of bribes. For Greece alone, Siemens budgeted $10 million to $15 million a year. Bribes were as high as 40 percent of the contract cost in especially corrupt countries. Typically, amounts ranged from 5 percent to 6 percent of a contract's value.


The most common method of bribery involved hiring an outside consultant to help "win" a contract. This was typically a local resident with ties to ruling leaders. Siemens paid a fee to the consultant, who in turn delivered the cash to the ultimate recipient. Siemens has acknowledged having more than 2,700 business consultant agreements, so-called B.C.A.'s, worldwide. Those consultants were at the heart of the bribery scheme, sending millions to government officials.


Mr. Siekaczek was painfully aware that he was acting illegally. To protect evidence that he didn't act alone, he and a colleague began copying documents stored in a basement at Siemens's headquarters in Munich that detailed the payments. He eventually stashed about three dozen folders in a secret hiding spot.


In 2004, Siemens executives told him that he had to sign a document stating he had followed the company's compliance rules. Reluctantly, he signed, but he quit soon after. He continued to work for Siemens as a consultant before finally resigning in 2006. As legal pressure mounted, he heard rumors that Siemens was setting him up for a fall.


The Siemens scheme began to collapse when investigators in several countries began examining suspicious transactions.


"On the inside, I was deeply disappointed. But I told myself that people were going to be surprised when their plan failed," Mr. Siekaczek recalled. "It wasn't going to be possible to make me the only one guilty because dozens of people in the business unit were involved. Nobody was going to believe that one person did this on his own."


The Siemens scheme began to collapse when investigators in several countries began examining suspicious transactions. Prosecutors in Italy, Liechtenstein and Switzerland sent requests for help to counterparts in Germany, providing lists of suspect Siemens employees.


In addition to Mr. Siekaczek's detailed payment records, investigators secured five terabytes of data from Siemens's offices -- a mother lode of information equivalent to five million books. Mr. Siekaczek turned out to be one of the biggest prizes. After calling his lawyer, he immediately announced that he would cooperate.


Officials in the United States began investigating the case shortly after the raids became public. Knowing that it faced steep fines unless it cooperated, Siemens hired an American law firm, Debevoise & Plimpton, to conduct an internal investigation and to work with federal investigators.


As German and American investigators worked together to develop leads, Debevoise and its partners dedicated more than 300 lawyers, forensic analysts and staff members to untangle thousands of payments across the globe, according to the court records. American investigators and the Debevoise lawyers conducted more than 1,700 interviews in 34 countries. They collected more than 100 million documents, creating special facilities in China and Germany to house records from that single investigation. Debevoise and an outside auditor racked up 1.5 million billable hours, according to court documents. Siemens has said that the internal inquiry and related restructurings have cost it more than $1 billion.


This article is a joint report by Pro Publica, PBS Frontline and The NYT.


p/s photos: Hwang Mi Hee



Women As Explained By Engineers




Thursday, July 09, 2009

Most Expensive City For Expats



In the latest survey by Mercer on Cost of Living Index for Expats, there were some surprises. Bracketed are their positions last year:

1 (2) Tokyo

2 (11) Osaka

3 (1) Moscow

4 (8) Geneva
5 (6) HK

6 (9) Zurich

7 (7) Copenhagen

8 (22) New York

9 (20) Beijing

10 (13) Singapore

Tokyo overtook Moscow as the most expensive city for expatriates, with the Russian capital city slipping to third spot but still maintaining its lead as the most expensive European city. Johannesburg is the world's cheapest city.


The significant reshuffle of cities in this year's ranking is mainly due to considerable currency fluctuations worldwide. All the US cities have become more expensive, with New York City jumping to 8th place because of the stronger US dollar.


London, on the other hand, fell to 16th spot from third last year due to the decline of rental prices and the weaker British pound. European cities are cheaper to live in, with Warsaw, for example plummeting from the 35th to 113th spot. In Asia, Chinese cities are on the rise as the Chinese renminbi gained strength over others. Beijing, for instance, is in ninth place.


In Mercer's survey, New York is used as the base city for the index and scores 100 points so all cities are compared against New York and currency movements are measured against the US dollar. The survey covers 143 cities across six continents and measures the comparative cost of over 200 items in each location, including housing, transport, food, clothing, household goods and entertainment.



p/s photos: snazzy signs for toilets



A Reminder To The Current Generation

Markets Assessment





















































Its been more than a week since I have posted that equity markets in general looked tired. Over the past few trading days basically reinforced my views. Markets have had a brilliant run for most of the first half of 2009. Generally, to sustain a bullish run for more than two months is difficult. In a normal market, you should be thankful to get two phases of bull run in a year, with each not lasting more than 2 months. Hence one should be thankful already. To be always 100% invested in markets is to make bloody sure that you want to be caught in a downtrend. Unless you are a big long term investors of the buy and hold mentality, you should find time to reduce your equity exposure every now and then, especially when it is so plain to read well.

Markets like Malaysia is mainly a trend and momentum market, thus rewarding those who trade. Its like a house that throws a party every 6 months, why show up when no one is around? Take your trading profits and go for a holiday. Get back in when conditions are better. I do think the last quarter and the first quarter next year could shape to be good markets for equity. Till then, take a break.



p/s photos: Janine Zhang

Goldman Sachs & Citi Still Running The White House




How Goldman Sachs and Citi Run the Show

The Wall Street White House

By ANDREW COCKBURN

Robert Hormats, Vice Chairman of Goldman Sachs, is to be installed as Under Secretary of Economics, Business, and Agricultural Affairs. This comes as one more, probably unnecessary reminder of the total control exercised by Wall Street over the Obama administration’s economic and financial policy. True, Hormats is “a talker rather than a decider” according to one former White House official, but he will find plenty of old friends used to making decisions, almost all of them uniformly disastrous for the U.S. and global economy.

Among the familiar Wall Street faces that Hormats will encounter in his new post will that of Deputy Secretary of State Jacob Lew, lately Chief Financial Officer of Citigroup Alternative Investments Group which lost $509 million in the first quarter of 2008 alone. On visits to the White House he is sure to bump into Michael Froman, who also tore a swath through the Citi balance sheet at the alternative investments shop (they specialized in “esoteric” investments such as private highways) but is now Obama’s Deputy National Security Adviser for International Economic Affairs. If Froman is otherwise engaged, Hormats can interface with Froman’s deputy, David Lipton, who was until recently running Citi’s global country risk management effort.

Citigroup is also well represented at Treasury, in the form of Lewis Alexander, formerly the bank’s chief economist and now Counselor to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. Given the role played by all of the above in bankrupting us all, Alexander’s 2007 verdict on the onset of the mortgage crash, “I think that’s not going to spill more broadly into the economy and so I think we’re going to have a normal kind of housing cycle though the middle of this year,” can only have been a recommendation in the eyes of his current employer.

Alexander’s function at Citi may have been merely to endorse the financial depredations of colleagues with economic blather, rather than exercise loss-making functions personally. Not so Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin, who has moved over to the number two job at the department from the Hartford Insurance Company, where he served as president and chief operating officer of the Property and Casualty Group. Hartford was one of the insurance companies that got suckered by the banks into backing their ruinous investments in real estate and other esoterica, but Wolin’s Treasury has just handed Hartford $3.4 billion of our money in the form of TARP funds.

Hormats’ agricultural responsibilities will of necessity bring him into frequent contact with the Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Gary Gensler – a former Goldman partner. As Assistant Secretary of Treasury in the Clinton Adminsitration Gensler played a key role in greasing the skids for the notorious Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, which set the stage for the great credit default swaps scam that underpinned the recent bubble and subsequent collapse. News of the appointment did generate threats of obstruction in the Senate – any one of the senators could have blocked the appointment had they really wished to do so – but such threats proved predictably hollow. Had they been otherwise, Treasury Chief of Staff Mark Patterson could of course have lent the expertise he gained as Goldman’s lobbyist to overcome the obstacle.

For sheer gall it would be hard to equal the appointment of Gensler, one of the engineers of this catastrophe, but the administration has managed it with the selection of Linda Robertson, formerly a key Enron lobbyist and intimately involved in pushing through the commodity futures act as chief flack for the Federal Reserve. Prior to joining the crooked energy-trading firm, Robertson was an important figure in the Clinton Treasury Department, latterly serving her friend Larry Summers and before him Robert Rubin during their terms as Treasury Secretaries.

Such connection to the key enablers of our bankrupt casino helps explain many of the other hires listed above. Michael Froman was Chief of Staff to Robert Rubin at Treasury before following Rubin to his reward at Citigroup. Most significantly, it was Froman who first introduced Rubin to his Harvard classmate Barack Obama. David Lipton also served in the Rubin Treasury, as deputy under secretary for international affairs. Neal Wolin, on the other hand, appears to have more an acolyte of Summers, who cherished him as Treasury General Counsel from ’99 to ’01. Summers and Robertson were similarly close, and certainly he raised no objection to her fatal submissions on behalf of her paymasters at Enron.

Recent reports suggest that financial industry lobbying in Washington, at $104.7 million for the first three months of 2009, is 8% down on last year. But that is to be expected – why should Wall Street continue paying top dollar for a wholly owned subsidiary?

Recent White House Appointments for ex-GS and ex-Citi bankers:

• Robert Hormats, Vice Chairman of Goldman Sachs, is to be installed as Under Secretary of Economics, Business, and Agricultural Affairs.

• Jacob Lew, Chief Financial Officer of Citigroup Alternative Investments Group, as Deputy Secretary of State
(Lew’s dept. lost $509 million in the Q1 2008)

• Michael Froman, Citigroup, Deputy National Security Adviser for International Economic Affairs. Froman was formerly Chief of Staff to Robert Rubin at Treasury, before following him to Citi.

• Froman’s deputy, David Lipton, ran Citi’s global country risk management effort.

• Lewis Alexander, Citigroup’s chief economist and now Counselor to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner

• Neal Wolin, President and COO, Hartford Insurance Company, Property and Casualty Group now Deputy Treasury Secretary (Hartford received $3.4 billion in TARP funds).

• Gary Gensler, Goldman Sachs partner, now Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission Note: It was Gensler who was a key proponent (as Clinton’s Assistant Secretary of Treasury) in pushing the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000.

• Mark Patterson, Goldman Sach’s lobbyist, now Treasury Chief of Staff

• Linda Robertson, Enron lobbyist, Chief PR Federal Reserve


p/s photo: Aum Patcharapa Chaichua



Wednesday, July 08, 2009

Faith Based ETFs - First Shariah Compliant ETF In The US


In April, FaithShares Advisors filed with SEC to launch a line of ETFs targeted at religions investors. While "socially responsible ETFs" and clean energy ETFs are nothing new, FaithShares proposed to narrow the scope of socially responsible investing significantly by offering funds focusing on specific denominations, including:

  • Baptist Values Fund
  • Catholic Values Fund
  • Christian Values Fund
  • Lutheran Values Fund
  • Methodist Values Fund

Although many were skeptical at the time that religious ETFs would be a viable opportunity, it appears that they are now becoming a reality, as Javelin Exchange Traded Shares (JETS), a new ETF company, launched its first fund. The Dow Jones Islamic Market International Index Fund (JVS) seeks performance that corresponds to a benchmark index that measures investment return on “Shari’ah compliant securities.”

The provider, Javelin Exchange Traded Funds, a brand-new independent ETF firm, started building the firm from scratch about 18 months ago. It’s nice to see amid the ETF industry’s consolidation new firms entering the market.

Just two days before July 4 — was there any symbolism in that date? — Javelin entered the market with the launch of its first ETF, the Dow Jones Islamic Market International Index Fund. The fund trades on the NYSE Arca and tracks the Dow Jones Islamic Market Titans 100 Index, a float-adjusted, market capitalization-weighted index consisting of 100 large foreign companies. The companies represent 23 countries and 18 currencies. Among country allocations, at the end of May, the United Kingdom posted the largest at 21.04% of the index, followed by Canada (10.71%), Japan (9.83%) and France (9.82%). The ETF charges a management fee of 0.68%.

In terms of portfolio creation, religious-based funds draw a significant amount of money from people who realize the need to invest in stocks, but don’t want their investment assets to fund activities outside their religious beliefs. Investors can find funds for Presbyterians and Catholics as well as Muslims. The beauty of these funds is that the fund providers vet their portfolio holdings for strict adherence to religious law so you don’t have to. Hence, if you’re a believer, you can still go to Heaven holding these portfolios. Not surprising then, most seem to follow a socially responsible investing strategy.

So, what kind of industries fall off the Muslim buy list? Anything forbidden by the Koran is screened out of the fund, such as alcohol, gambling, pornography and pork products. In addition, Shariah law objects to the borrowing or lending of money with interest. This knocks most, if not all, financial stocks, off the portfolio screen. According to Javelin, the index’s largest sector weighting as of May 29 was oil & gas, followed by basic materials, health care, technology and telecommunications.

“With over seven million Muslims in the U.S, we were surprised to discover that the investment needs of this vital population were not being met,” said Javelin President and Founder Brent Firth in a written statement.

Well, that’s not entirely true.

Amana Mutual Funds and Azzed Asset Management currently run funds according to Sharia law. Because of the Koran’s prohibition on moneylenders, Islamic-based mutual funds have significantly outperformed the broader market. The Amana Trust Income (AMANX), at $691 million the largest mutual fund that follows the Koran, has consistently beaten the S&P 500 for six out of the last seven years, with the other year falling below the index by just 0.1%. In 2007, when the bubble popped, Amana posted a gain of 14.1% compared with the 5.5% return from the S&P 500. And while Amana couldn’t avoid a loss last year — it’s a stock fund after all — its 2008 loss of 23.5% outperformed the S&P 500 by 13.5 percentage points, according to Morningstar.

There’s even a Halal index fund, the Iman K (IMANX), which follows the Dow Jones Islamic Index. That, however, posted a 40% plunge last year, compared to the 37% loss on the S&P 500.

But there hasn’t been an ETF Muslims could feel confident investing in. With an expense ratio nearly 50% lower than the Halal mutual funds, Muslims can now take advantage of the ETF’s benefits.

This, however, may be the year Islamic-based funds fall behind the broader market. During a recession, people do what makes them feel good and that means drinking, smoking, porn, gambling and overeating many pork-based products. In addition, with the financial stocks beaten down so badly they have a lot of upside. I must add, that so far this year, the Muslim mutual funds are still beating the S&P 500.

In addition, the new Islamic ETF doesn’t hold any U.S. stocks, so it won’t be able to directly benefit from any recovery in the U.S. economy.

“We went for an international fund because the mutual funds held domestic stocks and this was a unique market which didn’t have a fund tracking it,” says Javelin spokesman Charles Tennes. He adds Javelin may do an Islamic fund with domestic stocks in the future, but that’s not in the firm’s immediate plans.


p/s photos: Ema Fujisawa



Asia Rising - Part Three





"Dictatorship Has Given Asia an Advantage."

No. Autocracies, mainly in East Asia, may seem to have made their countries prosperous. The so-called dragon economies of South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Indonesia under Suharto, and now China experienced their fastest growth under nondemocratic regimes. Frequent comparisons between China and India appear to support the view that a one-party state unencumbered by messy competitive politics can deliver economic goods better than a multiparty system tied down by too much democracy.

But Asia also has had many autocracies that have impoverished their countries-consider the tragic list of Burma, Pakistan, North Korea, Laos, Cambodia under the murderous Khmer Rouge, and the Philippines under Ferdinand Marcos. Even China is a mixed example. Before the Middle Kingdom emerged from self-imposed isolation and totalitarian rule in 1976, its economic growth was subpar. China under Mao also had the dubious distinction of producing the world's worst famine.

Even when you look at autocracies credited with economic success, you find two interesting facts. First, their economic performance improved when they became less brutal and allowed greater personal and economic freedoms. Second, the keys to their successes were sensible economic policies, such as conservative macroeconomic management, infrastructural investment, promotion of savings, and pushing exports. Dictatorship really has no magic formula for economic development.

Comparing a one-party state like China with a democracy such as India is not an easy intellectual exercise. Obviously, India has many weaknesses: widespread poverty, poor infrastructure, and minimal social services. China appears to have done much better in these areas. But appearances can be deceiving. Dictatorships are good at concealing the problems they create while democracy is good at advertising its defects.

So the autocratic advantage in Asia is, at best, an optical illusion.


"China Will Dominate Asia."

Not likely. China is on course to overtake Japan as the world's second-largest economy this year. As the regional economic hub, China is now driving Asia's economic integration. Beijing's diplomatic influence is expanding as well, supposedly thanks to its newfound soft power. Even China's once antiquated military has acquired a full plethora of new weapons systems and significantly improved its ability to project force.

Although it is true that China will become Asia's strongest country by any measure, its rise has inherent limits. China is unlikely to dominate Asia in the sense that it replaces the United States as the region's peacekeeper and decisively influences other countries' foreign policies. Its economic growth is also by no means guaranteed. Restive secession-minded minorities (Tibetans and Uighurs) inhabit strategically important areas that constitute almost 30 percent of Chinese territory. Taiwan, which is unlikely to return to China's fold anytime soon, ties down substantial Chinese military resources. The ruling Chinese Communist Party, which views perpetuating its one-party state as more important than overseas expansionism, is not likely to be seduced by delusions of imperial grandeur.

China has formidable neighbors in Russia, India, and Japan that will fiercely resist any Chinese attempts to become the regional hegemon. Even Southeast Asia, where China appears to have reaped the most geopolitical gains in recent years, has been reluctant to fall into China's orbit completely. Nor would the United States simply capitulate in the face of a Chinese juggernaut.

For complex reasons, China's rise has inspired fear and unease, not enthusiasm, among Asians. Only 10 percent of Japanese, 21 percent of South Koreans, and 27 percent of Indonesians surveyed by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs said they would be comfortable with China being the future leader of Asia.

So much for China's charm offensive.


p/s photos: Michelle Yip Shuen



Tuesday, July 07, 2009

Why Science & Maths Must Be Taught In English




1. If Fed Ex and UPS were to merge, would they call it Fed UP?

2. Do Lipton Tea employees take coffee breaks?


3. If olive oil comes from olives, where does baby oil come from?


4. If people from Poland are called Poles, why aren't people from Holland called Holes?

5. Do infants enjoy infancy as much as adults enjoy adultery?

6. Why the man who invests all your money called a broker?


7. If horrific means to make horrible, does terrific mean to Make terrible?

8. Why is it called building when it is already built?

9. If a book about failures doesn't sell, is it a success?

10. If you're not supposed to drink and drive, then why do Bars have parking lots and car jockeys?

11. If you take an Oriental person and spin him around Several times, does he become disoriented?

12. If vegetarians eat vegetables, what do humanitarians eat?? Human ???




p/s photos: I have no idea who she is, anyone care to help out?


Integrity Of Bond Markets & Government's Implicit Guarantee



The freezing of payments to bondholders by Port Klang Authority has been 'welcomed' by many critics. However, the other side of the coin will have to be considered as well. There are 4 bonds outstanding which totals to RM2.8bil and there is currently a technical default due to non-payment into the DSR account.

On 30th July, SPV will have RM100mil maturity which is part of the RM600mil which the PKA wihtheld on 30th June. The general public only heard of the side where the project was a failure and all the "leakages".

There are institutional investors involved as well, and they are bondholders. Foreign investors holds about 45% of the total invested. The integrity of the Malaysian bond market has to be maintained. Yes, you can go on with the deliberations, and even if PKA wants to freeze payments, there should be a clear message being sent to the bondholders. There are already repercussions in the market place. There are questions about the government's implicit and explicit guarantee. Bank Negara will have to step in to clear the air. The unresolved situation may trigger concerns across all other government explicit and implicit guarantee on any kind of assets, and naturally a run on the ringgit.

In our pursuit for transparency and the truth, we must also be wary of the greater implications on the integrity of financial markets. Sober heads must prevail.

-----------------------------------
By Neville Spykerman / Malaysian Insider / 30 June 2009

PORT KLANG, June 30 — The Port Klang Authority (PKA) will withhold further payments due to Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) turnkey contractor Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd (KDSB) pending the completion of a full review by a task force set up on June 10. The payments, in four parts, amount to RM660 million.


PKA chairman Datuk Lee Hwa Beng said the decision to withhold payment was made by PKA’s board, which is bracing itself for potential lawsuits which may be soon filed in retaliation by KDSB. Lee said they plan to fight any lawsuits.


“We will wait for the outcome of litigation which will determine PKA’s true liability,” he said, adding that the board was acting in the best interest of the PKA.


The action by PKA’s board comes in the wake of calls yesterday by the DAP’s Lim Guan Eng for the Transport Ministry to stop payments to KDSB or any other parties, until the culprits responsible for the scandal are arrested and charged in court. The development cost for PKFZ may spiral up to a staggering RM12.5 billion, according to a PricewaterhouseCoopers audit report, from an initial cost of less than RM2 billion but to date no one has been held accountable.


The RM660 billion owed to KDSB is payable in four parts to special purpose vehicles created by KDSB. Among them are Transhipment Megahub Berhad, Valid Venture Berhad and Free Zone Capital. A total of RM330 million is due to be paid to KDSB by today while a further RM300 million will be due in July. Lee said that PKA, under the instructions of the Transport Ministry, had commissioned a task force to investigate the PKFZ project and had only recently started the process of gathering information.


“The full recommendations of the taskforce are expected to be submitted to the PKA and the ministry in August,” said Lee.



Lee, who was flanked by two lawyers at the PKA office today, was very cautious about the words he used during the press conference and made clear he wanted sidestep any potential lawsuits.

----------------------------------------
LATEST UPDATE & DECISION REVERSAL

PUTRAJAYA: The Port Klang Authority board has agreed to release payment due to trustees for bondholders after considering their appeal and the stand of the Finance Ministry.

PKA chairman Datuk Lee Hwa Beng said the board made this decision at its meeting to consider the appeal yesterday.

"The appeal letter dated July 3, 2009, described the background of the issuances of private-debt securities, comprising bonds and commercial papers (CP) as well as medium-term notes (MTN), by the four special-purpose vehicles.

"It also spelt out the consequences of non-payment and the possibility of the trustees acting upon the directions of the bondholders and CP/MTN holders enforcing the security charged."

Lee said PKA had also received instructions from the ministry that the board be mindful of the implications that might affect the confidence of local and foreign investors in the private-debt securities market.
He said the payment was to be made without prejudice, with reservation of the rights basis and without an admission of liability.

"PKA will, however, not waver from its earlier commitment to seek legal remedies and take action to determine its true liabilities and rights."

The board had on June 30 deferred RM660 million payment to Kuala Dimensi, the turnkey contractor for the Port Klang Free Zone project, pending the completion of investigation by its special task force.

PKA needs to pay Kuala Dimensi RM660 million in four instalments from last month to this month.

The first sum of RM130 million should be paid on or before June 30 under the sale- and-purchase agreement signed on Nov 12, 2002.

Another RM230 million was to be paid on or before June 30 under the development agreement dated March 27, 2004.

PKA has to pay RM150 million this month under the supplemental agreement for additional development works dated Nov 30, 2005, and another RM150 million also in July under supplemental agreement for new additional development works dated April 26, 2006.


p/s photo: Park Chae Rim

Pakistan's A Wild Card For The Future




While the media has been focusing on the political and economic upheavals of Pakistan in recent months, one should not be oblivious to the growing danger of Pakistan as a time bomb of sorts. Unless we engage Pakistan in a pragmatic manner, unless we have a 'democratically inclined and transparent' governance in the near future, Pakistan could prove to be "hot and trouble spot" of the future. Just to cite one factor - it has an unwieldy population now of 176m, which is slated to grow to 336m by 2030 and 446m by 2050. For such a large populous nation that is highly fragmented, it sure is a potent mix if Pakistan continues the way it has.

From Nomura strategy piece on Pakistan: In the past few weeks (and most notably in his 4 June major policy speech in Cairo), President Obama has gradually been unveiling a strategy which appears to be aimed at enhancing prospects for peace and stability throughout the Middle East and which seems to involve parallel diplomatic tracks from Bombay to Beirut. That process now looks to be accelerating as we enter a period which some commentators see as pivotal in determining the future of the region as a whole and where we judge stabilising Pakistan to be one of a handful of key objectives. While the Pakistan army’s recent push against the Taliban in the Swat valley has been broadly welcomed, concerns remain about its tactics and the related civilian casualties and refugee problem which may serve to make the authorities in Islamabad even less popular than previously. Much may now depend on the ability of the civil authorities to deliver immediate aid (including significant contributions from international donors) to the civilian population and to follow this up with the sort of long-term economic development which economic experts believe is essential to counter Islamic militancy.

Some recent claims by some experts (including US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton) that the threat posed by the Taliban to the Pakistan state is “existential” (or that it is likely to result in nuclear weapons falling into the hands of Islamic extremists) could be misguided, the army’s efforts in Swat have certainly not neutralised the Taliban’s ability to carry out terrorist attacks throughout Pakistan, which now appears to be its preferred modus operandi. Nevertheless, the Pakistan military has been encouraged by its success in Swat and, in a marked change of approach by the government, is now looking to expand its operations into Taliban-controlled frontier areas of the country, with advanced strikes being launched in mid-June in Waziristan (the main stronghold of the militant group Tehrik-i-Taliban). However, military experts judge that the army is likely to face significantly greater challenges than it did in Swat as militants disperse to other parts of the country (and, possibly, abroad) and as further humanitarian problems come into play as a result of the new offensive.

For all that, Pakistan’s political and economic fragility seems to have been eased – at least temporarily – by renewed US support (and sensitivity over drone missile strikes against suspected Taliban/al Qa’ida targets in the Pakistan/Afghanistan border region) under the overall guidance of Special Envoy Richard Holbrooke who has publicly noted that stabilising Pakistan is essential to the achievement of US/Nato objectives in Afghanistan. Additionally, the US seems to be reconciled to the prospect of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif returning to public office (following a recent high court decision to lift the ban on him) and possibly even driving through constitutional changes which would allow him to run for a third term as prime minister. However, any such move looks likely to deepen the rift between Mr Sharif and President Asif Ali Zardari (who is already widely seen as weakened by recent events in Pakistan) and could lead to renewed political turbulence and weak governance.

One more factor which we believe is likely to come into play with a new Indian government in its renewed efforts to broker a long-term settlement over Kashmir between India and Pakistan. However, it remains to be seen whether a weak Pakistan government could deliver on its side of any agreement, especially if the widely held view is correct that influential elements in Pakistan would prefer the current impasse to continue. There is, therefore, a significant risk in our view that any real progress in negotiations could precipitate further terrorist attacks in India originating from within Pakistan’s borders, with consequent serious implications for
regional security.
  • Stock market has gained 20.23% ytd from January to mid-June 2009. Yet it has been one of the worst performers in Asia. But it was fell by 58% in 2008.
  • Weak domestic economy, security and political instability and military action in the Swat valley have led to a sell-off by investors. Capital flight has raised the need for additional external assistance to finance defense and reconstruction spending and external debt payments
  • Valuations: With stock market rally in early 2009, P/E ratio has improved from the lowest level at 6.31 on January 2, 2009 to 10.89 on April 24 as improving current account balance based on strong remittances and aid from IMF and other countries enhanced market sentiment. However, with several risks to the stock market such as war in the Swat valley, widening trade deficit, portfolio outflows and deteriorating domestic consumption, the P/E ratio has slightly decreased to 9.54, the lowest level in Asia, in mid-June 2009
  • Outflow of portfolio and other foreign investment: Domestic and foreign investors turned net sellers in FY 2009 and sold US$ 1.1billion during July 2008 to May 2009. They were net buyers in FY 2008 at US$ 87.2billion. Foreign investors have sold shares worth US$ 290million until mid-June in FY 2009
  • Outlook for 2009: Easing monetary policy trend and low P/E ratio level relative to other Asian countries might be attractive. But ongoing risks such as political uncertainty, security risk, slowing GDP growth, weak manufacturing sector and tight budget conditions can hurt investor sentiment and lead further outflows of FIIs
  • Too much reliance on foreign funds and lack of strong positive stimulus will limit gains in the stock market
  • Terrorist attacks and outflows of foreign investment have made the stock market the cheapest in the region
  • Progression of ongoing military action and political stability will be key factors for the stock market ahead

    Currency
    :

  • In 2009, Pakistan rupee has been deprecated 2.9% from January to mid-June
  • In 2008, Pakistan rupee depreciated 13.7% against U.S. dollar. It started to depreciate from March 2008 and sharply declined until October 2008 when IMF announced an assistance package. It was reflecting foreign investor’s concerns about political instability, weak economic conditions and high inflation
  • Outlook for currency: Pakistan rupee is expected to remain weak. Sustainability of BOP is challenging amid declining FDI, risk of portfolio outflows and scarce forex reserves. Security risks due to ongoing war against Taliban,impact of contracting exports and slowing remittances on the current account, and weak economic growth will also have a negative impact on Pakistan rupee

    Bonds
    :

  • Pakistan 10-year government bond price in 2009 increased by 26.6% from January 2009 to mid-June and yields decreased by 26.9% until mid-June
  • Moderating Inflation has provided central bank room to cut interest rate by 1% in April 2009. Analysts expect central bank to cut interest rate further which will put pressure on bond yields ahead
  • Narrowing balance of payments (BOP) deficit due to surplus of current account improved market sentiment. Successful payment of government debt in February 2009 (US$ 500 million Eurobond and US$ 17million on account of interest payment) reduced fears of Pakistan debt repayment capacity
  • Ratings: S&P downgraded Pakistan’s credit rating to ‘CCC’, the lowest level in 10 years, from ‘CCC+’ in November 2008 due to deteriorating BOP and delay in securing external assistance. Moody’s rated Pakistan’s debt at ‘B3’ in 2008 due to political risks and falling forex reserves. “Ratings can downgrade further if government does not show secured external assistance”

p/s photos: Zhang Xin Yu

Monday, July 06, 2009

China's PMI - A Key Indicator


Both of China's two Purchasing Managers Indices (PMIs), an indication of manufacturing activity, have risen above the 50 threshold which indicates expansion of the sector. Manufacturing accounts for 40% of China's GDP and was in contraction as external demand for Chinese goods fell and domestic demand softened. A separate PMI released by the CLSA rose to 51.8 in June from 51.2 in May, its third month above 50.

Seasonality of the indices: April was the peak month in 2006-08, increasing around 1.2pts in the month. In each of the past four years, May-July had sequential declines. The April 2009 gains were again concentrated in investment related industries, necessary at this stage of the recovery, but leaving concerns about private sector revival. Breakdown of the June numbers: 14 out of 20 industries had above 50 PMIs with Smelting of ferrous metals the highest (60.3%).Chemicals was the lowest (44.4%). Stocks of finished goods have fallen. 5 of the 20 industries surveyed reported increases in employment whilst 15 industries registered decreases in employment. Seasonally adjusted, the PMI rose from 52.7 to 53.7, a peak since April 2008, matching with anecdotal evidence for electricity production and cargo traffic. continued contraction (for the 14th month) of the inventory index and employment sugests "that firms are no longer have significant downsize pressure, but are not in a position to expand".

Despite a weaker than expected improvement in the two manufacturing PMIs, the momentum in industrial production should be maintained in June suggesting a growth rate of 7.5% y/y in Q2 2009. Growth in electricity production will support this trend. Exports could remain sluggish before the G3 economies recover. Similar to March, the machinery and equipment sector led the production expansion. Production index for non-ferrous metals was above 50 as the industry benefited from the government accumulating inventory but, without a solid improvement in end-user demand, excess capacity could rise.


p/s photos: Maggie Cheung Ho Yee

Like You To Meet My Dog ...





















Had a couple of dogs when I was much younger, but its been a long time since I got one. Been planning for one, but surprisingly the acquisition was swifter than anticipated. I always had in mind that the dog has to suit my personality, and there must be some connection when I look into his/her eyes. So, ta-dah, may I introduce my dog ... over the first 24 hours still cannot fix a name for it. Started with Charley, then Dali... then it sounded stupid as it sounded as if I am calling myself ... still fluid but don't want to change the sound intonations too much as that might confuse the dog. So for now its Darlie.


Its almost 7 weeks, and the youngest of the litter, an English bulldog pup, very tiny now but should hit 35 to 40 pounds in a few months, more affectionate than the best hookers in Thailand, eats like a vacuum cleaner... thinking of calling it Vacuum! Will post updates on Darlie....

Asia Rising - Part Two





"Asian Capitalism Is More Dynamic."


Hardly. With the United States brought low by Wall Street and the European economy enfeebled by its welfare state and inflexible labor market, most Asian economies appear in great shape. It is tempting to say that Asia's unique brand of capitalism, by seamlessly weaving together strategic state intervention, corporate long-term thinking, and insuppressible popular desire for material betterment, will outcompete either the greed-devastated U.S. model or the hidebound European variant.

But though Asian economies-with the notable exception of Japan-are among the fastest-growing in the world today, there's little real evidence to suggest that their apparent dynamism comes from a mysteriously successful form of Asian capitalism. The truth is more mundane: The region's dynamism owes a great deal to its strong fundamentals (high savings, urbanization, and demographics) and the benefits of free trade, market reforms, and economic integration. Asia's relative backwardness is a blessing in one sense: Asian countries have to grow faster because they're starting from a much lower base.

Asian capitalism does have three unique features, but they do not necessarily confer competitive advantages. First, Asian states intervene more in the economy through industrial policy, infrastructural investment, and export promotion. But whether that has made Asian capitalism more dynamic remains an unresolved puzzle. The World Bank's classic 1993 study of the region, "The East Asian Miracle," could not find evidence that strategic intervention by the state is responsible for East Asia's success. Second, two types of companies-family-controlled conglomerates and giant, state-owned enterprises-dominate Asia's business landscape. Although such corporate ownership structures enable Asia's largest companies to avoid the short-termism of most American firms, they also shield them from shareholders and market pressures, making Asian firms less accountable, less transparent, and less innovative.

Finally, Asia's high savings rates, by providing a huge pool of indigenous capital, undeniably fuel the region's economic growth. But pity Asia's savers. Most of them save because their governments provide inadequate social safety nets. Government policies in Asia penalize savers through financial repression (by keeping deposit rates low and paying household savers measly returns on their savings) and reward producers by subsidizing capital (typically through low bank lending rates). Even export promotion, ostensibly an Asian virtue, seems overrated. Asian central banks have invested most of their massive export surpluses in low-yielding, dollar-dominated assets that will lose much of their value due to the long-term inflationary pressures generated by U.S. fiscal and monetary policies.


"Asia Will Lead the World in Innovation."

Not in our lifetime. If you look only at the growing number of U.S. patents awarded to Asian inventors, the United States appears to have a dramatically receding edge in innovation. South Korean inventors, for example, received 8,731 U.S. patents in 2008-compared with 13 in 1978. In 2008, close to 37,000 U.S. patents went to Japanese inventors. The trend seems sufficiently alarming that one study ranked the United States eighth in terms of innovation, behind Singapore, South Korea, and Switzerland.

Reports of the death of America's technological leadership are, to paraphrase Mark Twain, greatly exaggerated. Although Asia's advanced economies, such as Japan and South Korea, are closing the gap, the United States' lead remains huge. In 2008, American inventors were awarded 92,000 U.S. patents, twice the combined total given to South Korean and Japanese inventors. Asia's two giants, China and India, still lag far behind

Asia is pouring money into higher education. But Asian universities will not become the world's leading centers of learning and research anytime soon. None of the world's top 10 universities is located in Asia, and only the University of Tokyo ranks among the world's top 20. In the last 30 years, only eight Asians, seven of them Japanese, have won a Nobel Prize in the sciences. The region's hierarchical culture, centralized bureaucracy, weak private universities, and emphasis on rote learning and test-taking will continue to hobble its efforts to clone the United States' finest research institutions.

Even Asia's much-touted numerical advantage is less than it seems. China supposedly graduates 600,000 engineering majors each year, India another 350,000. The United States trails with only 70,000 engineering graduates annually. Although these numbers suggest an Asian edge in generating brainpower, they are thoroughly misleading. Half of China's engineering graduates and two thirds of India's have associate degrees. Once quality is factored in, Asia's lead disappears altogether. A much-cited 2005 McKinsey Global Institute study reports that human resource managers in multinational companies consider only 10 percent of Chinese engineers and 25 percent of Indian engineers as even "employable," compared with 81 percent of American engineers.


p/s photos: Nancy Wu Ding Yan




Sunday, July 05, 2009

Thank You Note



Thanks to all who were kind enough to contact me on the "events manager" thingee. I have made my decision on my partner in this thing. Anyway, thanks to all the efforts and suggestions to Eric How, Ashton Tan, Syukri Sulaiman and Bee Kong.



p/s photos: Han Chae Young

Asia Rising - Part One



The esteemed Foreign Policy magazine has been putting out great perspectives on the rise of Asia, both as an economic power and militarily, albeit the latter is much more fragmented. The first part looks at the realistic predictions of China or India as economic powers in their own right. While growth rates and population strength have been often cited, its still a long way off.

Asia is nowhere near closing its economic and military gap with the West. The region produces roughly 30 percent of global economic output, but because of its huge population, its per capita gdp is only $5,800, compared with $48,000 in the United States. Asian countries are furiously upgrading their militaries, but their combined military spending in 2008 was still only a third that of the United States. Even at current torrid rates of growth, it will take the average Asian 77 years to reach the income of the average American. The Chinese need 47 years. For Indians, the figure is 123 years. And Asia's combined military budget won't equal that of the United States for 72 years.

In any case, it is meaningless to talk about Asia as a single entity of power, now or in the future. Far more likely is that the fast ascent of one regional player will be greeted with alarm by its closest neighbors. Asian history is replete with examples of competition for power and even military conflict among its big players. China and Japan have fought repeatedly over Korea; the Soviet Union teamed up with India and Vietnam to check China, while China supported Pakistan to counterbalance India. Already, China's recent rise has pushed Japan and India closer together. If Asia is becoming the world's center of geopolitical gravity, it's a murky middle indeed.

Those who think Asia's gains in hard power will inevitably lead to its geopolitical dominance might also want to look at another crucial ingredient of clout: ideas. Pax Americana was made possible not only by the overwhelming economic and military might of the United States but also by a set of visionary ideas: free trade, Wilsonian liberalism, and multilateral institutions. Although Asia today may have the world's most dynamic economies, it does not seem to play an equally inspiring role as a thought leader. The big idea animating Asians now is empowerment; Asians rightly feel proud that they are making a new industrial revolution. But self-confidence is not an ideology, and the much-touted Asian model of development does not seem to be an exportable product.


"Asia's Rise Is Unstoppable."

Don't bet on it. Asia's recent track record might seem to guarantee its economic superpower status. Goldman Sachs, for instance, expects that China will surpass the United States in economic output in 2027 and India will catch up by 2050.

Given Asia's relatively low per capita income, its growth rate will indeed outpace the West's for the foreseeable future. But the region faces enormous demographic hurdles in the decades ahead. More than 20 percent of Asians will be elderly by 2050. Aging is a principal cause of Japan's stagnation. China's elderly population will soar in the middle of the next decade. Its savings rate will fall while healthcare and pension costs explode. India is a lone exception to these trends-any one of which could help stall the region's growth.

Environmental and natural resource constraints could also prove crippling. Pollution is worsening Asia's shortage of fresh water while air pollution exacts a terrible toll on health (it kills almost 400,000 people each year in China alone). Without revolutionary advances in alternative energy, Asia could face a severe energy crunch. Climate change could devastate the region's agriculture.

The current economic crisis, moreover, will lead to huge overcapacity as Western demand evaporates. Asian companies, facing anemic consumer demand at home, will not be able to sell their products in the region. The Asian export-dependent model of development will either disappear or cease to be a viable engine of growth.

Political instability could also throw Asia's economic locomotive off course. State collapse in Pakistan or a military conflict on the Korean Peninsula could wreak havoc. Rising inequality and endemic corruption in China could fuel social unrest and cause its economic growth to sputter. And if a democratic breakthrough somehow forces the Communist Party from power, China is most likely to enter a lengthy period of unstable transition, with a weak central government and mediocre economic performance.


p/s photos: Yuna Ito

Saturday, July 04, 2009

Najib's First 100 Days



There is an interesting talk on Najib's first 100 days. Its not free but seats are very limited. Please call to reserve your seats.


PRCA

StraightTalk on


Najib’s 1st 100 Days

A Report Card by Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah

7.15pm, Friday July 10

HELP University College

Pusat Bandar Damansara, Kuala Lumpur


RM40 for members and RM50 for non-members (dinner is included).

Limited to 100 pax & registration closes Tuesday July 7


As Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak hits his 100th day in office on July 11, every Malaysian will probably judge him in one way or another. One may say he is known for “1-Malaysia, 2-Stimulus Packages and 3-Liberalisation Initiatives”. What would you write on his Report Card?


Sharing with you his Report Card on Najib is Umno veteran Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah. This nine-term Gua Musang MP and eight-year Minister of Finance has certainly seen “up close” how all Malaysian Prime Ministers worked.


The StraightTalk programme will begin with dinner at 7.15pm after which Tengku Razaleigh will take the floor followed by a question-and-answer session.


It is open to all PRCA members and non-members by invitation. Enquiries can be directed to 03-22876700 (Melissa), fax 03-22876701 or email secretariat@prcamalaysia.org


StraightTalk is a PRCA initiative designed to inform, share, debate and challenge thought-provoking issues of interest.


The Public Relations Consultants’ Association of Malaysia (PRCA Malaysia) was formed in 1999 and is registered with the Registrar of Societies. PRCA Malaysia brings together professionals from specialist public relations and communications firms; corporate communication departments; as well as students who are dedicated towards enhancing the standards and the practice of public relations in the country. PRCA Malaysia serves as a forum for members to discuss industry-related issues, such as quality, professional development, evaluation and training. It also organises SpeakEasy and StraightTalk featuring speakers from public relations and professionals from various industries to discuss and debate topical matters of interest. SpeakEasy is designed for younger PR practitioners while StraightTalk is aimed at spurring interest in more serious matters affecting society, industry and the State.


p/s photo: Kelly Lin (who won't be attending)



Your Favourite Sport Determines Your Career

Friday, July 03, 2009

Secrets Exposed: How To Make A Woman Happy!!!






How to make a woman happy...

It's not difficult to make a woman happy, a man only needs to be:
1. a friend
2. a companion
3. a lover
4. a brother
5. a father
6. a master
7. a chef
8. an electrician
9. a carpenter
10. a plumber
11. a mechanic
12. a decorator
13. a stylist
14. a sexologist
15. a gynecologist
16. a psychologist
17. a pest exterminator
18. a psychiatrist
19. a healer
20. a good listener
21. an organizer
22. a good father
23. very clean
24. sympathetic
25. athletic
26. warm
27. attentive
28. gallant
29. intelligent
30. funny
31. creative
32. tender
33. strong
34. understanding
35. tolerant
36. prudent
37. ambitious
38. capable
39. courageous
40. determined
41. true
42. dependable
43. passionate
44. compassionate

WITHOUT FORGETTING TO:
45. give her compliments regularly
46. love shopping
47. be honest
48. be very rich
49. not stress her out
50. not look at other girls

AND AT THE SAME TIME, YOU MUST ALSO:
51. give her lots of attention, but expect little yourself
52. give her lots of time, especially time for herself
53. give her lots of space, never worrying about where she goes

IT IS VERY IMPORTANT:
54. Never to forget:
* birthdays
* anniversaries
* arrangements she makes


HOW TO MAKE A MAN HAPPY:
1. Show up naked or just wearing a cotton tee.
2. Bring beer.
3. Hand over the remote.
4. Discuss how to rank the following women on attractiveness, sexiness, as a lover: Jessica Alba, Megan Fox, Scarlett Johanssen.


p/s photos: Reon Kadena

Estimated Demand For USD


This has to be the most interesting graphs I have seen for a long time. It has been able to plot US financing needs, US deficit, and get this.... the estimated official demand for USD!!?? Obviously central banks are pulling back a lot, and even the average investor have been shying away now... after the silly risk aversion that caused the silliness flight to USD a few months back. Looks like a long haul for the USD from here on.... which is actually good news for US equities... always look for the silver lining. As you enter a tunnel, it becomes darker and darker... it is always darkest before dawn... unless the spark of light from afar is an oncoming train!!!


If I had to pick a single graph to explain the evolution of the United States’ balance of payments – and thus, indirectly, the entire story of the world’s macroeconomic “imbalances” – this would be it.

cofer-v-us-thru-q1-09

All data is in dollar billions, and is presented as a rolling four quarter sum.*


The red line is the United States current account deficit.


The black line is the United States financing need – defined as the sum of the current account deficit plus US outward FDI and US purchases of foreign long-term securities.** The dip in the total US financing need from mid 2005 to mid 2006 isn’t real. It reflects the impact of the Homeland Investment Act, a holiday on the repatriation of the foreign profits of US multinationals that produced a sharp fall in outward FDI.*** The rise in the United States financing need over the course of 2007 by contrast is real; American investors bought the decoupling story and wanted to invest more abroad.


The shaded area represents official demand for US assets. The inflows from central banks that report data to the IMF and Norway are known. The inflows from central banks that don’t report and other sovereign funds are my own estimates. The key countries that do not report reserves are – in my judgment – China, Saudi Arabia and the other countries in the GCC. I have assumed that the dollar share of their reserves is closer to 70% than 60% (supporting evidence). I by contrast have assumed that the GCC’s sovereign funds have a diverse portfolio.


What does the graph tell us?


In my view, three things:


First, the rise in the US current account deficit from 2002 to 2006 is associated with a rise in official demand for US assets. The quarterly IMF data doesn’t extend back to the late 90s – or to the early 1980s. But trust me, that is a change from past periods when the US current account deficit expanded. To be sure, private investors abroad were also buying US assets. But the rise in the overall US financing need associated with the rise in the current account deficit wasn’t financed by a comparable rise in private demand for US assets.


Second, Official demand for US assets soared from the end of 2005 to the end of 2007 – even by the standards of this decade. That surge was hidden, as the majority came from countries that don’t transparently report the currency composition of their reserves (let alone their sovereign funds). But it happened. At the peak of official asset accumulation in late 2007 and early 2008, official demand for US assets (best I can tell, and if my estimates are off – do tell, and explain, with data) exceeded the total US financing need. Central banks and sovereign funds were financing both the US current account deficit and the “diversification” of private US portfolios. Absent that uptick in official demand, the US would have experienced a dollar crisis before it experienced a banking crisis.


Third, official demand for US assets has fallen quite sharply over the last four quarters. Paul Krugman is right. The US depended on China’s central bank – and other official investors – far less over the last four quarters than it did in late 2007 and early 2008. The collapse in gross private capital flows during the crisis rebounded in the United States’ favor, as Americans scaled back their investment abroad faster than foreigners scaled back their investment in the US. The fiscal deficit may be up, but US “dependence” on central banks for financing fell sharply.


At least through the first quarter. The second quarter of 2009 will be to be different. Reserve growth seems to have resumed.


But there is little doubt that reserve growth slowed sharply from mid 2008 to mid 2009. The countries that report detailed data on their reserves to the IMF reduced their dollar reserves from the end of q1 2008 to the end of q1 2009 by about $130 billion. That is a fact not a guess. Guessing the overall total requires guessing what China (and Saudi Arabia did). But there is little doubt that China’s overall reserve growth slowed – so unless it was diversifying into the dollar, its growth in its dollar reserves must also have slowed.


Wait. Doesn’t the US data (including the Fed custodial accounts) tell a somewhat different story? And doesn’t the US data show record inflows into Treasuries?


All true.


My estimates of dollar reserve growth (and the available data from the IMF) are at odds with the US data showing a pick up in official demand for Treasuries.

cofer-v-us-thru-q1-09-2

What gives?


My explanation: central banks reserve managers pulled funds from banks, the US agencies, and private fund managers – producing an uptick in demand for Treasuries.


We know that this happened inside the US. From the end of q1 08 to the end of q1 09 central banks reduced their dollar deposits in US banks by about $200 billion – providing a lot of the funds that flowed into Treasuries. I would bet the same thing happened globally.


p/s photo: Fay Hokulani


Thursday, July 02, 2009

Need An Events Manager - Help!




I have been getting a lot of emails from university students and fresh graduates on how to get into Financial Markets. I think there is a big audience (students and parents). While I am willing to organise a talk (not free one la), I am having problems with the logistics. I need an events organiser (or entrepreneur) to help me with this.

What I require from the organiser:
- to book the venue
- to market the event to colleges
- to have sales points (or internet booking facility) for ticket sales
- can go on revenue share

The gist of the talk:

Planning A Career In Financial Markets

Do you aim to be:
- a Fund Manager
- an Equity Analyst
- a Forex Trader
- a Private Equity player
- an Investment Banker
- a Corporate Finance executive
- an equity Dealer
- a Bond Trader
- a Hedge Fund analyst

The talk is by S Dali of Investing Scents weekly business column in The Star. He is an ex fund manager and head of research, for local and foreign investment houses, having worked in Sydney, HK, Tokyo, Singapore and KL.

Topics covered:
- the right degrees for the right careers
- ranked universities vs local universities vs second tier foreign universities
- specific subjects and majors
- is CFA the passport to success
- are you suited for the financial markets or do you just want to get rich quick
- getting through the front door, reworking your resume
- indirect passages to sound financial markets' careers
- what if your degree consisted of poor grades
- critical success factors to have for viable financial markets career
- remuneration scale for financial markets
- command of English, essential or unnecessary
- things financial markets employers look for
- is financial markets for you
- things they don't teach at business classes


Serious parties only, please email me at malaysiafinance@gmail.com


Thanks.


p/s photos: Kristy Yeung Kung Yue, also note that the girls featured in this blog will not be part of the talk

Impact of New Equity Rules



From a Mr Geoff Ho: Dali, what do you think of the recent announcements regarding bumi equity rules for Bursa listed cos? Will this trigger a wave of equity restructuring & M & A that would enhance shareholder values? Previously some companies are reluctant to do so for obvious reasons. The market seem dead after the announcement is this a non event or owners of companies are pausing just in case there are surprises.

The changes are long overdue. It is a structural change, and would yield benefits for the longer term but does nothing for the short term. If we were in a highly bullish market, the market will certainly take the news very positively and move higher. A market's condition will react to good and bad news differently. If the market is neutral, the news will have to have an immediate benefit and a progressively good long term benefit in order for the market to react. I have explained that we are not in a very bullish market.

The reason why the local bourse did not react positively to the news is NOT because of the news but rather that there are too many long positions being held by traders, and not enough fresh funds willing to jump in at this level.

The rules change is not a non-event. There are many solid private companies that are kept private or may be considering being listed in other exchanges because of the rules. The important thing is to make sure the rules are not flimsy or temporary, do not effect changes and modifications to the changes over the short term. Make sure everybody knows the rule change is permanent.

As for listed companies, it will be a sigh of relief as many are already not having the required bumi shareholding. We have to address this long term issue as well. Too often the 30% has been taken up by "connected parties" who then disposes the shares quickly in the open market at a profit. It makes the life of listed firms very difficult as they have to keep finding substantial bumi shareholders to fill the gap. The rule change will eliminate that problem.

In order to ensure there is proper bumi participation and that the benefits accrue to as wide a spectrum of people as possible, we need the qualified local funds to adopt a more professional investing approach. Do proper research, take up the 5% or 10% in an IPO and ride with it for the long term. The government has set up enough local and state fund management firms, but not enough are doing it professionally enough. If they invest and ratify their investing behaviour like Templeton or Peter Lynch, it is one sure way to ensure that bumi equity participation will continue to grow and unit holders will benefit from corporate earnings and dividends expansion as the economy matures.


p/s photos: Erika Sawajiri


Wednesday, July 01, 2009

New Building Collapsed In Shanghai


Now just imagine if you own the new apartments in those buildings next to the one that collapsed over the weekend. Look at the uprooted foundations, they did not really pile that deep, did they?!!

A 13-storey residential building under construction in Shanghai collapsed on Saturday, killing one worker and highlighting the dangers of shoddy building in fast-urbanising China.


The building, in the outskirts of the city, collapsed at around 6 a.m. (2200 GMT), with one construction worker killed, the official Xinhua news agency reported. The building was located at the suburban Lotus Riverside complex.


The block of high-rise residential flats was shown toppled onto its side in a muddy construction site. Exposed pilings stood in the remains of the building's foundations.


It appeared to be almost complete with fitted windows and a finished, tiled facade. Other similar-looking blocks in the same property development were still standing nearby.


Shoddy construction and the use of sub-standard materials is a concern in China's construction sector as the country scrambles to build out cities and finish massive infrastructure projects to keep pace with fast economic growth.


Shanghai authorities are holding nine people in an investigation into the collapse of a nearly finished 13-story apartment building, the government said Monday after the latest in a string of accidents that have plagued the country's construction boom.



Collapsing bridges, highways and buildings in China have often been linked to endemic corruption, as officials and contractors skimp on construction materials or issue approvals without proper inspections. Such problems are more common in rural areas and inland provinces than in major cities like Shanghai, where controls usually are more rigorously enforced.



To be fair, the building was under construction and thus unoccupied, but it's still a minor miracle that there was only one fatality. Sounds like there was a problem with some nearby flood prevention walls at the Dianpu River, but there's no hard evidence as to why this huge building simply fell over.



Sigh... why look at China... we have our own mess, don't we!!??

Markets Looked Tired



After having ridden the markets for about 15%, I can say that at present levels the markets everywhere looked tired. I did say that this year the Sell In May mantra may not be good advice. Good is good, it cannot lasts forever. The current run is sustained by additional inflow of funds back into the market place. We already had very decent months in March, April, May and June. A normal market rally or rebound rally normally don't lasts that long.

I would reduce my exposure to stocks from 80% to just 20% till the picture is clearer. I looked at the market leaders board for the past week and am totally unconvinced with the market leaders. If you are not going to go up, its down, baby. Look for me at 1,000 or thereabouts.

Markets cannot keep the momentum up for so long, we still have to remember that fund managers need to go on holiday plus they need to reserve their bullets for the last quarter.



p/s photos: Misaki Ito

Got A Question For Bank Negara




Dear Madam Zeti,


There is a curious trend in bank lending which I am sure you are aware of, but is troubling to me. I am sure you are aware that all property loans (or almost all property loans) given out by Malaysian banks have a 5 year lock in period. During that 5 year period if you want to refinance your loan by the same bank or take it to be refinanced to another bank, you will be whacked with a 5% penalty on outstanding amount.

Say you bought a house in 2006 for RM500,000 with a RM400,000 loan with rate of 6%. Naturally with rates coming down over the last 12 months, you should refinance the balance, but you cannot.

Is this ruling fair to property owners? Is this rule sanctioned and encouraged by Bank Negara as it obviously benefits the banks at the expense of the borrowers. Is this to stop other banks from "stealing" loans from one another? If it is, then banks SHOULD allow for refinancing inhouse with no penalty - why should borrowers not have that choice?

As the country tries to deflect a recession, interest rates come down as a monetary tool by Bank Negara. What good is the tool, what good is the lower rates if a substantial portion of the loans are "locked in", unable to take advantage of the lower rates? This neutralises the lower interest rates policies as property loans make up a huge portion of most households' balance sheet.

Why are local banks having it so good? Why can't the public be beneficiaries of better and more open competition among the banks? A borrower will go to a bank because of the service it provides. Why does that "better service" automatically goes out the door the moment you sign off on the loan? Why can't a person switch to a lower cost option two or three years down the road? If a bank loses a loan to another bank, it means the other bank can compete more effectively - i.e. lower cost of funds.

The local banks are acting like a cartel... they all agree to do this so that all can enjoy supernormal profits, lock in profits, all to the detriment of the consumer. No need to watch The Sopranos, we have the local banks.

I can understand a window of a lock in period for the banks to recoup some marketing cost, but certainly not 5% penalty.

Bank Negara should:
a) reduce the lock in period from 5 years to 2 years
b) reduce the penalty from 5% to 2%

This is one of the many big reasons why Malaysian properties are sluggish.



p/s photos: JJ