On the up and up in Singapore, and crash #GE2020

2 years ago, and 3 years into the PAP's victory in the 2015 GE, the PAP government promised these:

1. Increase in GST rate - from 7% to 9% starting between 2021 and 2025
2. Increase in water prices by 30% starting July 2018
3. Increase airport tax - to build Changi Airport T5
4. Parking charges to be imposed at all public schools
5. Increase public transport fares (as alluded to by Khaw Boon Wan in Parliament in May 2018)

True to form, the PAP government does what it says it will do, baring circumstances like COVID-19 - a once-in-a-century phenomenon.

1. The GST rate increase will still take place between 2021 and 2025, probably later rather earlier. Maybe 2023.

2. Check - done

3. Changi Airport T5 has been suspended because there will not be demand due to COVID-19, so the Airport Tax will not be increased anytime soon

4. Check - done

5. Check - done

What is the state of play in the coming GE 2020?

In 2020, the PAP government spent nearly $100 billion of Reserves to fight the COVID-19 pandemic. Some feel that it could have been less, if only it had dealt with the elephant in the room early on instead of soaking in the adulation of the world about Singapore's success in containing the spread of the virus on the island in the early days. This elephant refers to the Foreign Worker community living in cramped Dormitories, which number no less than 200,000 - a figure hard to miss, but was missed. In retrospect, if we had insisted on masks like what Hong Kong has done all along, a couple of 10's of billions of dollars would have remained in the Reserves, and businesses will still have been able to operate for much of the time.

Going forward, COVID-19 will still hog the limelight, at least for another year. Would more diverse voices in Parliament with teeth be needed to see the country through more successfully and saved us a couple of 10's of billion of dollars? Based on what has happened, the answer must be an unqualified "yes".

Like me at Another Say

Bread and milk

Breadtalk didn't really have to stop selling its "fresh" soya milk, really. It just has to learn to tell real 'fresh' milk from, err..not real 'fresh' milk, that's all. Short of having a cow (or soya milk making apparatus at the back of the kitchen), this is what fresh milk looks like:



It would have saved itself 50,000 pork floss buns, a red face and a lot of goodwill. While nobody is complaining about those freebies, for some, the damage is already done..

Murky Broth

Of late, for every 10 SMS messages that I have received, 8 o f then begins with the qualifier <ADV>. Needless to say, I have become very annoyed with these unsolicited messages. SMS is not like Email. Its something that you would want to check in on because it is more immediate and the person who sends it probably wants to get your immediate attention. Nowadays when I fish out my phone to check my SMS, I often only do one thing - delete the SMS. Its ridiculous. I have to pay to receive something that I never asked for. Some might even call this cheating. Its really getting on my nerves, the same reason why I NEVER answer my handphone calls when the number is one I do not recognise. Experience tells me that 10/10, that call is a telemarketing call, or a call to sell my house, or someone suggesting that I protect myself, my family, my house, my car, and yes, even my dog. Now I have nothing against people selling insurance. They perform a vital advisory service and I have benefitted from such advice. If on the off chance it is a call from someone I know, that person will call back. But this SMS spam is not so easy to deal with. You don't have spam filters that email systems have that will send them to the trash bin immediately. You become a virtual hostage to unwanted and uncalled for messages. But what is upsetting is that  it appears to have the blessings of the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC). As far as I can tell, everyone except the self-interested stakeholder businesses are up in arms and crying foul.

The point is that the PDPC, as CASE puts it, "has back-pedalled and diluted the intention of the DNC (Do Not Call) registry". The PDPC has now allowed for SMS and Fax messages sent by businesses, or whatever entity, to bypass the DNC restrictions so long as there is an "ongoing relationship" between the business and its customers. How does one define "ongoing relationship" anyway? If we adopt the PDPC's understanding of the term, it can be used to define ANY number of transactions between a business and it customers, even "one-night stands". It will be no stretch of the imagination that a business can stalk a customer simply because the PDPC has given its blessings. The PDPC says that an organisation that breach any of the data protection provisions in the PDPA may be liable for a financial penalty of an amount not exceeding $1m. But how can such violation be proved and acted upon if the exceptions and exemptions can be made post-PDPA?

I am in no way suggesting that businesses that engage in direct marketing be banned. By all means communicate with your customers in whatever way that customer chooses provided that he has explicitly and clearly given consent. Now, anything beyond that is ambiguous, and laws are not meant to be ambiguous, are they? It appears that in Singapore, when the government jumps into bed with businesses, a murky broth can surface, to the extreme discomfort of the people to whom it has given its word to care and protect.

Mind your own IT business

Singaporean, or at least those politically-aware, would have seen it coming. A reportedly shell company owned entirely by the PAP buying up a software system that was developed with tax-payer money for the sake of maintaining a software system that experts have judged as "obsolete and unmaintainable" defies every rule of business logic. But let me not be accused of repeating anything libelous. After reading through whatever is there on the internet regarding the AIM-AHTC saga, both from AHTC and AIM, I came away with the distinct impression that AHTC has not explained the situation clearly and fully, and AIM has not been convincing at all with its explanation.

This is why the blog posts on this subject by Mr Alex Au on his Yawning Bread blog has not only captured the attention of the social media, it has been vetted through a fine toothcomb by the PM's lawyers, who have determined that parts of the posts are libelous and threatened to sue. Truth be told, I don't read Yawning Bread at all, but due to the publicity that has been stirred up, I have also begun my "fine toothcombing" of the posts, some of which are quite lengthy and appears to have been a product of extensive research. Dr Teo Ho Pin's explanation (defence) of the issues raised by both WP's Sylvia Lim, bloggers and social media, pales in comparison. To me, his explanation raised more questions that it answered. Quite obviously, he has never been an IT professional, but trying to explain an IT business. It's like expecting Ms Saw to run a train company, no?

I do not propose to jump into the fray to add my 2 cents worth, for it is only 2 cents after all. I have no first hand contact with either party that I can add meaningfully to the unfolding events. The only thing I want to say is that it appears that the PAP has become rather petty of late. It used to be that they were focused on winning the hearts and minds of Singaporeans, never mind that similar libel laws have been used in the past. I don't know about Mr Au's political affiliations, but he appears to be a private citizen expressing his opinion publicly in a medium that even PAP stalwarts and Ministers have embraced with a vengeance. And anyone who have read those posts will come away with the impression that it is not all rant. Is this precisely the reason why he is being sued, that he is being too honest? (Brazen is another word to substitute for honest).

Unfortunately, those who are late to the "game" will never be able to judge for themselves as the offending post has been removed from the blog. How to have a conversation like that?

Read AsiaOne for reports around this saga. Then trawl the internet for the details.
Is this AIM or is that AIM?

Almost Numero Uno

Wow, Singapore will overtake Las Vegas as the world's second largest gambling den in terms of gambling, err... gaming revenues this year? And we thought that Singapore has only just started. Resorts World Sentosa only opened in 14 January last year, and Marina Bay Sands a little later on 27 April 2010, all slightly more than a year ago, and we are already #2, worldwide?

Singapore are known for many first, and best's. Best airport in the world, best airline (SIA), busiest Port, best paid government (excluding under-the-table shenanigans of politicians in some countries), first F-1 night race... Add to these Singapore's record speed in reaching #2. At slightly over a year, it is early days yet to supplant Macau's number 1 spot right now.

But not everyone in Singapore are necessarily happy about this dubious position. Behind this spectacular result lies many broken hearts, homes and businesses. What else do you think those numbers mean? And this also goes to show the big fat 'lie' when proponents in government, of gambling, pitched it as an Integrated Resort. Unfortunately, time has a way of making us forget a lot of things. Well, Marina Bay is not known for its Conventions, Suntec City, and even the grand old Raffles City are bettered used. Hotels? Any tourist agency worth its salt will direct customers to more location friendly hotels in the city, except if you are a gambler. And how much would the just opened Science Art Theatre have contributed to the overall revenues? I am not sure if it is even making money. Dining? Who dines there except the gamblers? The only non-gaming place worth going to, in Marina Bay is the SkyPark, and Universal Studios Theme Park in RWS.

So I am just one damned confused Singaporean what INTEGRATED really means.

Not Playing Ball

I thought I'd never say this, but pity Singtel and Starhub. Why? Because it appears that not enough people want to play ball. Many people have expressed unhappiness over the high subscription price that both Telcos are charging for watching the Football World Cup 2010 in the comfort of their homes, never mind that some of these games are played in the dead of night or early morning in this part of the world. I don't know if it is bravado and then silently, people are subscribing, or if people are following through with not subscribing but will be watching the games free at public eateries like coffeeshops and 24-hour restaurants such as McDonalds.

Actually Singtel and Starhub don't deserve this desertion by its customers. We all know that the real culprit behind this price inflation is not them. I think they have tried their hardest to secure the rights after much pressure from the public, and even the government, may I add. Rather it is Fifa and their appointed agents who are to be blamed. So if you want to set up a Facebook page, don't set up one, or two, against our Telcos. Blast the real bl**dsuckers - Fifa and its Agents.If you don't want Fifa repeating this rip-off 4 years hence, then boycott Fifa, and make this loud and clear. We should never have pressured our Telcos to close a deal, and then left the ball in their hands. If things go on like this, they will likely make a loss from the Football World Cup 2010. In which case, don't blame them if next time, they don't want to play ball either.

p.s. Well, ok, Singtel probably brought this on all of us after it showed how much money it had by paying and arm and a leg for the BPL broadcast rights.

Do your math

I am alarmed to read in MyPaper (22 April 2010) that some of our local undergraduates are taking anti-sleep pills to force themselves to stay awake. Why are they doing this? Well, according to the report, these undergraduates need the time not only to study, but they also need it to attend to businesses that they are running at the same time. The report doesn't say what these businesses are, but the impression given is that these businesses are not part time pursuits meant to defray livings costs and school fees, etc., something which is quite common in tertiary level education. Rather, the impression is that these businesses are serious enough to be careers in the making. The focus appears to be to build a business that will generate a steady income (lots of it too) by the time these young people turn 30. That's when they say they will stop the sleep-reducing drug and lead a more normal life, while enjoying the fruits of the sleep-deprived labour.

It isn't wrong to have ambitions early in life, and it isn't wrong to want the good material things in life early either. But when that is the overriding consideration, at the risk of long term damage to one's health, then you really need to reflect on what you are doing. Young people, they always think they can live forever and they throw caution to the wind. They should remember what a wise man once said. Paraphrasing him, "What does it profit a man if he should gain the whole world and loses his own life/health?"

Young man, there is yet time to 'make it', but don't die making it now. The Mathematics just doesn't add up.

Hot Kopi

From what I saw yesterday, the businesses situated in Kopitiam Square (KS) aren't doing that great. Already I am seeing 'For Rent' signs going up in no less than 8 stalls that have recently been vacated. Somebody told me that whereas there were 3 chicken-rice stalls 2 months ago, it has been reduced to one now. And there used to be 2 roti-prata stalls. One announced that it was moving its stall to another part of KS, and that it will resume operations on 1 April 2010. It is now 11 April, and it is still not open, leading one to wonder if it is not an April Fool's Day joke. It is only slightly over 3 months since KS first opened for business with much fanfare back in December 2009. One of the complaints about that place is it is hot hot and hot. Add in the natural humidity of our weather and you feel you are in a gym working out instead of eating out.

It isn't that Kopitiam is not doing anything about this problem, it seems. I visited KS this morning and saw a number of un-assembled giant stand fans in one of the vacated stalls. I assume that they are meant for diners in the Square, to help blow away the heat and humidity. Singapore has been experiencing very hot weather of late and these fans will be a relief, though I wonder how diners will feel eating and having a blow-dry all at the same time. Maybe Singaporean diners can view this as value-for-their-money?

I suspect that stall holders are giving up their leases prematurely or trying to rent out their spaces due to the possibility that they cannot make enough money to cover the high rents they must undoubtedly have signed onto. Kopitiam has to pay half a million dollars every month to the government, who are the landlords of the piece of land KS is sitting on, so they can only reduce rental so much before they start to bleed cash themselves, if they have not already started bleeding, i.e.

KS has turned out to be quite a good place to have around Sengkang, and I would hate to see it becoming a shell of a foodcourt. Fortunately, the wet market appears to be doing well. At least the number of these business occupants appear to have increased, and the wet market looking really like a wet market. And the dry good shops are still there - a bonus for shoppers visiting this place. Fortunately they haven't closed, yet. Well, lets see if the giant fans will save the place.

Busted

Sheng Siong used to be the toast if the middle to lower income households in Singapore. The prices of its products at its supermarkets were really the cheapest in town, cheaper even than the prices of NTUC Fairprice supermarket's 200 controlled items. Housewives make a beeline for the supermarket. Even my mother gushed about its really cheap products. I dropped by and verified it myself. But of late, it appears to have abandoned its low price approach to business, or at least when it come to property management. It bought up 6 heartland wet markets and increased the rental by a reported 30%. It also shortened the lease to a maximum of 1 year, triggering off suspicion that it might want to convert these wet markets into something more lucrative - say, supermarkets? A cost leader must increase and/or expand its outlets and floor space so as to sell more of the same at low prices. This is one of the primary strategy to increase revenue. That's what NTUC Fairprice has done. That's the business logic behind hypermarkets such as Carrefour and Giant in Singapore.

Doing more of the same for the wet market stallholders - i.e. not increasing rental and cutting lease periods, will be nothing but performing charity, from a business perspective. So of course Sheng Siong is not going to maintain the status quo. But to its credit, HDB has warned that it will not allow Sheng Siong to change the business use of these 6 places. HDB says that the wet markets must stay, but Sheng Siong can charge as much as it thinks makes business sense, which, if you think about it, may yet work in Sheng Siong's favour. They may not rake in as much as they had planned to do so, but an increased 30% margin is not bad, actually.

But of course, the consumers will ultimately bear the increased cost of grocery at a rate that will ultimately drive them to the supermarkets - probably what Sheng Siong would want happen. The wet markets will ultimately be abandoned and deserted, so something 'new' can rise up in their place. Well, if this is what Sheng Siong had planned to do all along, then it is now starring at a bad investment. Yes Sheng Siong may own the markets and the land, but the government owns the right of use of the territory. And the Housing & Development Board (HDB) has done the right thing this time. Although it goes against the government's oft-stated position that businesses should be left to make their own commercial decisions, this is potentially a hot political potatoe to leave alone in the simmering charcoal. If not handled properly, many of the powers that be could get their fingers burnt. And that's bad for people who need to go to the electorate to renew their license to rule in the near future.

More or Less

Singapore's property prices have burst above the roof and is heading for the stratosphere. That's the general talk now in the coffee shops. A coffee-drinker pal of mine remarked the other day that he cannot see himself buying an apartment for more than S$1,000 psf, and he wasn't thinking of the uber-ultra luxury apartments and properties along Orchard Road and Sentosa Cove. It's just the run-of-the-mill condos that people seem to have an insatiable apetite for nowdays that he was referring to.

I couldn't agree more, or umm, well, less. I agree because I can't see myself buying at those prices, but I do have a private apartment which I suppose I can sell at those prices too, which will give me no end of pleasure, not to mention, wealth. So you will find me talking like a snake nowadays - depending on whether you are with people who want to buy or sell.

Well, whether it is to buy or sell, I find it hard to believe REDAS' Simon Cheong (I really really would want to believe him) when he insisted that if developers got land cheaper from the government, they would price their apartments lower. Yes, they CAN price their apartments lower, but would they? Unless you are facing a housing glut, and everybody is either dead broke or the environment is just not favourable, no self-respecting property developer will price their property below the market price. That's doing good business. Developers are hardly charitable organisations, and Mr Cheong, of all people, should know that.

So on the whole, I agree with the MND. I'd rather the government make the money, for which it can then use to spread around the benefit to the public rather than have the developers build and buy more property with the inflated margins that they have already made, which they can then sell at inflated margins, etc. etc.

Actually my grouse with property developers nowadays is that almost every condo they develop leaks water. I thought it was my apartment, until I keep hearing the same stories from anybody and everybody I meet who has bought into a condo in the last 10 years or so. When you find out about the leaks, the one year warranty would be over,  and its your problem, buddy. I cannot understand this. Even TV manufacturers give 3-year warranties, but condo developers (and I think HDB too) are only confident their apartments will hold together for only a year.

So I have this advise for people making a beeline, or who have already put down the deposit for their dream condo. Go through every room and every wall, and every inch of the floor, and the ceiling (particulary false ceilings), the cornices and the air-con pipes to look for cracks, hollow-sounds and damp trunkings - all within the first year. Frankly, the quality of condo apartments sucks and if you are going to pay more than a thousand dollars psf for that apartment, you owe it to yourself to minimise any grief that you will certainly face some months or years down the road.

A sharing we will go

Well, things develop really fast, or is it that I am slow? Lui Tuck Yew has now announced that the government is jumping into the commercial fray by mandating that any and every content, whether exclusively obtained by any media company, such as Singtel and Starhub, have to be shared. i.e. made available on each other's setup boxes. And this is suppose to kick in from September 2010.

Sadly, this doesn't apply to the monopoly broadcasts that Singtel has earlier secured for the BPL games. Otherwise, there will really be no need for soccer-mad fans to subscribe to mio TV in order to get their BPL broadcasts for the next 3 years.

But this is the right direction. Hopefully, prices will come down as a result of mandating the sharing of 'exclusive' content. Signing up for an extra box wasn't a good idea to start with. The question now is - how much Singtel/Starhub are going to charge their rival's subscribers for the content originating from each other? From a commercial standpoint, it has to break even on their investment, plus some margin on top of that. And probably enough to 'persuade' people to subscribe to mio TV / Starhub Cable.

Well, lets see.

Broadcast Disaster

Singtel recently apologised to about 10,000 of its mio TV subscribers due to a reported software glitch that denied these customers the use of their mio TV signals, i.e. 10,000 went without TV for 2 or more days. As compensation, it threw open its entire stock of channels to mio TV subscribers as a gesture of goodwill and apology. Actually, its dead heat rival, Starhub, regularly throws open their entire stock of channels every once a while to its cable TV subscribers for no other reason than generosity (well, ok, it is still business, not charity).

Singtel recently secured the sole rights in Singapore to carry and broadcast all Barclays Premier League soccer matches, depriving Starhub, which currently holds the license, a significant chunk of its business. Singtel was very happy and its CEO, Mr Allen Liew gloated over it, outright rejecting any sharing of the broadcast signals with Starhub. So in the last couple of months, subscription to Singtel mio TV has increased substantially (so I heard) if only because soccer-mad Singaporeans are willing to be held ransom to watching their favourite sports on TV. Now, with the glitch, Mr Allen Liew must be sweating in his pants that mio TV outage does not happen when it begins broadcasting these games later this year. Can you imagine how angry these soccer-mad mio TV subscribers will be if their mio TV signals malfunctioned, especially in the middle of a match between Manchester United and Chelsea? And that the malfunction lasts 2 or more days?

So on second thoughts, it is probably prudent for Mr Liew to resume talks with Starhub on sharing those signals. At least people who own both mio and Starhub cable won't be so angry. In the meantime, they had better look at upping the reliabilty of their mio system, say to the level of 100%?

Kopi same

Kopitiam, the operator of cooked food establishments under the Kopitiam label opened its latest food establishment - the Sengkang Market and Food Centre (this is HDB's original label for the place) situated at a corner of Sengkang Square in the northeast corner of the island. It is a much anticipated opening because it promised the availability of a wet market - something that, if we believe what we read in the press, people are clamouring for. And, in spite of running the largest cooked food centre among tenants on the 4th level of Compass Point, it went ahead and bid $500,100 a month for the new Sengkang Market and Food Centre. Its closest rival bid, from Sembawang New Market, was $256,788, almost a quarter of a million less, making Kopitiam look like either like a fool, or desperate, or greedy, or all of them, i.e. desperate greedy fool.

Of course, to recoup that investment, the majority of the floor area is devoted to cooked food stalls. The much anticipated wet market takes up only about a fifth of the total floor area in this food establishment - something quite different from what the tender document called for. Clearly the wet market is a sideshow, probably not able to financially sustain the sky-high rental Kopitiam has to pay the government each month. I suppose the cook food stall business is a very profitable one. The prices of the food items are slightly lower than equivalent food stalls situated just across the road in Compass Point. But when we compensate for the lack of air-condition, this newest food centre's prices comes up to roughly the same as the air-conditioned one. The food assortment is more or less the same. There are many more cooked food stalls (for example, there are 3 stalls selling chicken rice). The convenience factor cannot be matched both for customers and for Kopitiam though. This is because it can operate for longer hours compared to the one in the shopping mall, and it can collect parking fees too. So I suppose it'll be profitable for Kopitiam though some cooked food stall operators in Kopitiam's Compass Point location have expressed the concern of cannibalisation of their businesses. But this is of no concern to Kopitiam because they will collect the same rents at both places anyway.

What is my feeling about this food centre? For one, I am underwhelmed. Really, for the real estate it occupies, it is more of the same thing,which makes Sengkang Square that much less attractive. Its single floor design is really a waste of land. And for the excitement it evoked when a wet market was first announced, the actual space devoted to it is really insignificant and a let down of sorts. I get the feeling that wet markets are not in fact all that popular, not what a small but vocal minority makes them out to be. Kopitiam realises this and probably did the right thing by relegating it to a sideshow.

I also don't like the fact that Kopitiam is operating major food establishments on both sides of the road. What benefit can consumers look forward to in terms of lower food prices, better customer service and more responsive operators? Zilch, numero zero, ling dan. Nope, life has not improved with this latest of commercial ventures blessed by no less than the government. One is left to rue what could have been if the operator with the second best bid had secured the contract to operate this business. The government should reflect on its 'it is a commercial decision' mentality. The government's business is to help the people lower cost of living, and not to improve the bottom line of businesses, particularly when it concerns what should have been a lower cost of eating and going to the market, given its budget/no-frills design.

Kopitiam Sengkang

That Lie

Marina Bay Sands Singapore is supposed to have opened its doors for business this month. That was the original plan, but we all know that plans can change, and in the case of the Marina Bay Sands Singapore (aka Hotel and Casino Resort), the revised opening date is some time in April 2010 though some say that June 2010 is a more realistic date.

April, when April Fools' day falls, is probably not an ideal month to open a Casino, from the gamblers' perspective. But it'll probably be roaring business of a casino though because gamblers are by nature risk takers, fools or not. These revision in schedules show up the lie in the whole Integrated Resort (IR) message. When Singapore went ahead with setting up not one but two casinos, the government insisted that it wasn't casinos per se, but an integration of various entertainment and convention businesses (MICE) that were on the cards, that Singapore isn't transforming itself into a Las Vegas of the East. Casinos were just to be a small part of the whole development. But the latest developments (or probably non-developments) has given the lie to this claim.

When push comes to shove, and it is time for payback. the only most immediately profitable business that must be opened first is the casino. So come April or June next year, or whatever month it eventually opens, the casino business must precede all others. The business / conventions / meeting / entertainment events? Well, they are not Marina Bay Sands' priority, really. From recouping the money point of view (more than S$5 Billion), the casino business is the one and only bet on the table, never mind what the government says about having 50% of the other businesses in place as a condition for the casinos to start operations. But then, starting the casino first makes sense. Nobody would want to have a major meeting event there, or go shopping, and least of all, go there for a stroll when half of the place is still under construction. The dust and dirt will be an instant turnoff. Orchard Road will still be a cooler place to go to, in more ways than one. But gambling? Hey the dirt doesn't matter. When gambling can take place in a back alley as much as it can in a swanky hotel, it is the only sensible thing to do - take the money and run.

So if we want to call a spade a spade, we should just admit that Singapore is close to becoming the betting capital of this part of the world. The rest are just sideshows. The problem is, with the government's liberal policies on immigration, will it attract the 'right' people to this island in the long run? It would appear that climate change is the least of our worries.

Ballshit

Here we go again. This time, the really big one, the mother of all ball games - the 2010 Fifa World Cup South Africa next year, no less. (Sheesh, that phrase is trademarked). What event can be bigger than that for a world crazy about 11x2 (minus the occasional red carded) people kicking an inflated rubber ball around a rectangular field?

And to fit the size of the event, Fifa, the world football governing body, has seen fit to extract that pound of flesh from the very people that give life to this activity. In Singapore, the main broadcast providers, Singtel and Starhub, have very sensibly colluded to get the best deal they can from the licensing people in Fifa. Yet even this collusion might not guarantee a sensible price at which armchair footballers might be willing to cough up. I hear that Fifa is expecting everyone to serve up an arm and a leg for the rights to broadcast the World Cup matches. Talk about profiteering. The price for watching club football in Britain's EPL is bad enough. They routinely also extract that pound of flesh for broadcast rights, which football crazy fans so willingly offer on the altar of the mother of all balls. I suppose Fifa has wised up to the game and wants in too. The colour of money excites more than balls, stupid! What they will do with that money is beyond me. Maybe fly first class to any and all meetings around the world to start with. They say money corrupts. Are we witnessing the beginning of the fall of soccer once the greed sets into every part (read: people) of the game? Well, ok, they did SAY they will donate the proceeds, but when you cause pain to countless so that you can appear generous to some...I am not so sure where the charitable spirit lies...(Hmmm...I wonder if Fifa's accounts are audited, and if so, by whom?)

Many say soccer is the beautiful game. Well, I agree. Its a beautifully 'green' game, and I don't mean environmentally friendly. I can see where some people can spot the beauty in the game. Soon the officials will be so swamp with the cash that they wouldn't even care what a ball looks like, or care if it is made of bullshit, much less what to do with it (handle it? - yeah this is accepted in FOOTball nowadays - the rote has set in, led by some of the world's best footballers like Diego Maradona and Thierry Henri, who win matches with their hands, whether sanctioned by God or not).

So when this happens, people will be knocked to their senses to see how they have been fooled all these many years into coughing up blood money to people who just kick a ball (and handle it once a while) and people who just organise these kicking ballfests.

Have the rest of us humans become so dumb that we willlingly let others swindle us in broad daylight? Yeah, blame the balls.

EPL ransom

It is news that didn't bother me at all, but it has got quite a number of people in Singapore upset yet resigned over it. No, it isn't about the local S-League that has come up for criticism from one of its own. It definitely is not about Ris Low, nor the revivied mini-bonds saga. It wasn't the earthquake in Sumatra, which shook many Singaporean's out of their highrises. No, its is about the most important thing in many people's lives in Singapore today - watching the English Premier League (EPL) games 'live' on TV.

Many were upset to learn that their erstwhile provider for EPL broadcasts, Starhub, has lost its broadcasting rights to rival Singtel. Just when they were settling down on the skyhigh prices that Starhub currently charges, they are faced with the propect of paying more in a year's time. As both operate the transmission of their programmes using different platforms, die-hard fans will have to invest on both platforms - cable and mio, or give up their cable (Starhub) equipment in exchange for Singtel's mio. Such is the grief that honest but desperate consumers have to suffer from big businesses trying to hook them in. But why are these broadcast rights so expensive?

It is business. If Singtel thinks that it can 'extort' the kind of money it will probably charge viewers of these programmes, and these die-hard fans are willing to shell out that kind of money, then its a willing buyer willing seller situation. Well, Singtel did say that it will not charge more than what Starhub charges now, even though the amount of Singtel's bid is reportedly twice what Starhub paid (i.e. US$160m) when it secured the rights in 2007.

Whatever Singtel will charge is not important to me. What is important is that they don't go off and start cross-subsidizing their services, and recover the costs of the EPL license from non-viewers like me. Charge whatever you need to charge soccer-mad fans for their fix, but don't increase the prices of other services, such as mobile and fixed-line services. I am not a soccer fan and I do not want to pay for Singtel's madness, and those EPL soccer fans as well. If they find joy in contributing to the overpaid soccer players in the EPL, that's their pleasure and their right. I do not want to be a part of it.

Otherwise, I am sure MDA, or someone with a big stick, will look into it.

Thank you foreigners!

Tunnel boring for Singapore's MRT circle line was completed today. (Today and The Straits Times, 18 August 2009, p12 and p4 respectively). The Straits Times had a picture showing the large boring mechanism in the background and everyone clapping and jumping in celebration. Normally this is unremarkable. Sure they should be happy. Its a job completed without any more loss of life. But one thing caught my attention about the photograph.

If one didn't know better, one could be forgiven to think that the boring took place somewhere in India. Every single person in the picture looks like an Indian! I don't see any Chinese, or Ang Mo for that matter. It just goes to show that the real credit for Singaporean's getting a world-class transport system is due in no small measure to some of our imports - foreign labours, just as it took our forebears - today's Singaporeans' fathers and grandfathers who hail from India and China, to build Singapore into the modern city-state that it is today. Even as Singapore celebrates its National Day, it bears remembering that our prosperity, our first-class infrastructure, comes from the toil and sweat of the very same peoples who settled in this land more than 50 years ago and whose sons from that same faraway land continue to do so today.

Yes, they are not doing it for free. But the smiles on their faces, and the jubilant cheering (I can only imagine this) shows how much pride they have in their work. Imagine, celebrating an achievement which they may never get to enjoy as they must go home to India (or wherever they came from) one day. Given that most Singaporeans are unwilling to work in such jobs anymore, we owe them a debt of gratitude in helping make our journeys to and from work faster and a lot more bearable.

Corporate Responsibility

Some call it Corporate Social Responsibility - CSR for short. Corporations see it as good PR to be seen to be generous towards non-profit purposes, for the good of the community, such as acts of donations to charities, organising meaningly charitable events at their expense, and etc.

Great Eastern Life just did that - not in the usual way we associate it with CSR, but it is CSR at its best. Why? Because its payback is not immediate nor guaranteed while it swallows, on behalf of its investors, the losses that have fallen on its GreatLink Choice investment products. My mother made a startling remark about 5 months ago - that bankers have become professional fraudsters. For all her life, she has kept her money faithfully in a bank, not under the bed, nor in the drawer. And she got us all to keep our monies in the bank too, for the interest that it would earn. So can you blame her when she put a substantial amount of that money in what a relationship manager called a high-yield structured investment product? She had wanted to open a fixed deposit account with the cash, actually. After all, she has been trusted banks with her cash for over 40 years. Structured or not, the banks are selling it and they must have evaluated the product's risk. They said it was low-risk high-yield. What's more, they also threw in the principal guaranteed / principal protected words. Little did we know that banks' definition of 'guaranteed' and 'protected' can be so convoluted that it would take a couple of lawyers to untangle it, or make it more confusing, depending on who you spoke to.

So, 'Thank you', Great Eastern Life and OCBC Bank (the parent), for taking what must be a difficult decision to return all the money that people have invested in structured products with you, knowing that their values have plunged 40-80% today. That's good 'ol banking - honouring people's trust and keeping their money safe, like it has always been, until recently.

Toasted

I have been watching on the sidelines the election debacle at Aware (Association of Women for Action and Resarch). After all, it is about women and does not in the least affect me. Many have weighed in with an opinion or 2, including PN Balji, editor of the Today newspaper. It is Balji's opinion that the old guard of Aware should not be sour grapes for having many of its people kicked out of the Executive Committee. Instead they should welcome new blood and all. Of course there are those who disagree, pointing out that these 'young turks' are unknowns, unliked, and probably unable. They point out that these newly elected people have not made even a squeek one week after their elections, leading them to wonder if these people are real or not.

Of course people are speculating that the hidden agenda of this new group is to take Aware along the straight and narrow - no to homosexuality and yes to straightlaced religiousity, which is causing concern among the old guard and the more liberal amongst them. Now what is wrong with saying no to homosexuality and being religious? It is a point of view, much as irreligiosity and homosexuality are another set of beliefs? If we tolerate one party to push the homosexual agenda, why can't we let those sitting on the other side of the fence to do so with their beliefs, and respect those views? Whether one side or the other prevails depends on whether and how society supports or rejects either party's agenda.

The old guards should accept that they have been out-maneuvered through the rules they have put in place and maintained for 25 years. If nothing, they left the door open and now they are blaming others for sneaking in? They should kick themselves in their collective behinds instead. If any blame is to be placed, it must rest squarely on the complacent shoulders of the old guard, who, until now, assumed that their way is the only way for women, an obviously arrogant, presumptious and oppressive stance. If this were a military encounter, the old guard will be toast, much like what the British suffered in Singapore at the hands of the Japanese in 1941 - marching down Upper Bukit Timah Road to surrender the flag of the mighty British Empire that had ruled Singapore for more than a hundred years and thereafter to incarceration for the next 4 years, some never living to taste freedom again.

Thank God that they can still do an EOGM. I hope they believe in God because they can do with some divine intervention now. Whether they will succeed remains to be seen.

Paradox of recession

Nothing is predictable in Singapore nowadays, or at least, some things do not work according to the script.

Consider the opening of the newest shopping mall, Tampines 1, in the middle of one of the deepest recessions in Singapore. Retailers and even the Retailers' Associations have, in the recent past, asked the government for help in cutting costs, such as reducing the GST from 7% to 5%. The government said no. And after witnessing Tampines 1, who can blame them?

Tampines 1 sits on the site where Sogo was. It opened last week, to throngs of people. If there is one thing you can trust Singaporeans to do, it is shopping at the latest malls. I avoided the mall (yea, I am an atypical Singaporean) on its opening day, as well as the weekend, for obvious reasons. I thought today, Monday, would be a good day to visit. I was wrong. The crowd at this Mall on Monday afternoon is nothing like a weekday crowd. Everybody on the island seem to be there, from the children to the teenagers to the adults in businesses and casual wear to the aunties and uncles, all of them were there. I can begin to understand the gridlock that shoppers were faced with last weekend at this mall.

The Japanese retailer chain, Uniqlo, the newest new thing, was shuttered, not because there weren't any customers. Yes, it had drawn down its shutters, but a long queue of would-be customers were lining up just outside, ready to rush in when the shutters come up again. How any retailer would envy at this state of affairs. The mall is much bigger than I'd imagine it to be because I used to visit the old Sogo quite often before it shut. I could imagine the retailers at Tampines Mall and Century Square swatting flies all day long. The crowd was over the other side of the MRT station - in Tampines 1, stupid!

People just came, like bees to flowers, except that visitors came to dump their money into this newest of new places whereas bees would suck dry the nectar from the flowers. Come to think of it, that's what the shoppers were doing - sucking dry the merchandise using their not-so-hard-to-part money. Hey there's a recession going on, if you've forgotten. But then again, it should be like this if one wants to break the spiraling cycle of thrift, which has the effect of choking economic activity thereby worsening the recession.

My one complaint is the food sold at Kapitan, the Kopitiam food court located at the 4th level. Let me rephrase that. My complaint lies with one food stall in Kapitan, the stall that sold char siew rice. When my companion put the plate of char siew rice on the table, the stranger sitting next to me exclaimed at the portion - it was very small indeed. This is the first time that a total stranger has ever made such a remark. Singaporeans tend to be a reserve lot. They'd usually just whisper among their own group of friends. So you can imagine how small the portion really was to elicit such an unbridled comment! But this takes the cake - it costs $3.80! Cough cough cough... And in case you were wondering, there is nothing out of the ordinary about the rice, the char siew, the cumcumber and the sauce. In fact, you could getting better char siew rice at $2 elsewhere.

I thought, if this is how much things will cost, I shuddered to think how high prices will be at the planned wet market in Sengkang Square when it goes into operation. Kopitiam won the bid to build and operate it just 2 weeks ago. And their bid was 2 times the next highest bid. There may be some red faces in Kopitiam right now, but I think they will have the last laugh because they know they can recoup this exorbitant investment quite quickly. That's because people will still flock to this market even if it prices are higher. The reason is very simple - there just isn't anywhere that can compete with the convenient location of this planned wet market. This lack of competition is something that HDB overlooked when it pretended to understand how free markets (there is no effective competition) worked. Of course, there have been complaints and dismay expressed by heartlanders of the prospect of having yet to pay more. The initial euphoria of having a wet market at your doorstep is turning to disillusionment. At the end of the day, the ward's MP and the HDB will be the ones with red faces.

This is living in Singapore today - all full of irony and contradictions.