SGX asking for public views

The SGX is asking the public for views on whether it is ok to let banks become trading members, ie full time brokers to trade in stocks. Is this a fair proposition to ask the public? In the case of locking up the people's CPF savings through minimum sum, CPF Life, locking them up in the Medisave, the public's view was not sought. They just do it without any need for consultation when it should as the people would have a lot to say on their own money and things affecting them directly. The issues were then more easily understood. Here we have a financial issues that have implications and consequences beyond the layman in the street. Only the academics or finance professionals would be able to give any reasonable views and inputs. But these people are unlikely to waste their time as their time and effort are expensive. So who does SGX expect to respond to their invitation for views on such a technical issue? It will be more meaningful for Sheng Siong to ask the public if it is ok for them to take over the wet markets and change them into something else. It would be more meaningful if Teo Ho Pin and other MPs affected by this wet market issue to ask their constituents for views and feedback. The public can only make reasonable feedback on things that they can comprehend at their level. The talents at SGX should be in a better position to decide whether the banks should be allowed to dabble in stocks. Is there a conflict of interests? Should banks be allowed to deviate from their core business into other high risk areas? How would it affect the businesses of other financial institutions? Would there be unfair advantages or unlevel playing field? How would it affect the jobs in the industry? How would it affect the stock market as a whole? And there are many more issues related to this move, ethical, moral and administrative etc etc. The answer is best answered by the professionals paid to do the job.

Goldman Sachs made US$3.46 billion in a quarter

There you have it, the most profitable bank in the world. How could a bank make that kind of money in 3 months? What kind of business is it in? I don't think the most profitable casino can make this kind of money in three months. Must take out my hat to Goldman Sachs. And they too were recipients of public funds during the financial crisis, and nearly collapsed. How could the turnaround be so dramatic? I am very sure they are not doctoring their books. The profit must be real. So where did they make this kind of money? CDOs, hedge funds, stock markets? When they can make this kind of money, someone out there is losing big time. And many broking houses are recommending a buy on Goldman Sachs despite it being sued by the SEC. Who is wiser? It is good to believe that money can be made so easily. All the banks must adopt the Goldman Sachs business model if they want to make this kind of money.

Selling the Singapore Brand

Walking into UOB's spacious banking hall in Battery Road as a customer is a new experience. No queue, everything a breeze. The atmosphere is like a big lounge for customers to spend a pleasant and easy time chatting with the bank officers. It is so friendly, no hassle. Banking is indeed a breeze. And I believe Wee Ee Cheong need not have to sweat to provide such a great experience for his customers. Any middle manager who cares and bothers, and put on his little thinking cap, could easily transform the procedures and processes into one that is sensitive to customer needs. Oh, I am not a customer of UOB, so I am not partial. If the CEO has to be bothered with such nitty gritties, then what the hell are the middle managers doing? No wonder UOB is number one. Customer friendly and making banking a great experience. UOB should franchise their procedures and market it to the world as the Singaporean Style of management, as a sought after product. With such quality services and processes, why the need to look further for foreign talent? The way UOB runs its banking hall operation is worthy as a case study for other banks. Good job UOB.

Chua Mui Hoong to the rescue

The spin that property prices are well managed and that there is no property bubble is given another positive take today. The high prices are good and probably planned to be that way. Chua Mui Hoong has said all that needs to be said, the govt has don't all the right things for the home owners. I remember a few days back that the CEO of DBS, Piyush Gupta, had said that there was already a bubble. So everyone can call it whatever they like, got bubble, no bubble, half bubble or quarter bubble, suit yourself. The fact is that the new buyers are going to be hanged if they don't have the money to buy a decent unit. But of course there are the affordable ones to suit their limited budget. No money don't complain, and don't expect too much. I could also presume that the state of the property market was all carefully calibrated to what it is today, prices, supply and demand. If this is the case, then I would say it is all under controlled and expected. Well done.

The great invitation by SDP

I read in the net that SDP had invited Teo Ho Pin to sign a joint letter in protest over the 30% hike in rent for wet market in Bukit Panjang. Teo Ho Pin flatly declined and said it was his constituency and he would know what to do to help his constituents. I will say nice try SDP. The invitation is as good as a still birth the moment it is conceived. How could Teo Ho Pin agree even it is a good thing or right thing to do? Anyway, the contituents in Bukit Panjang need not worry as Teo would surely come out with something to help them with the rental hike. Maybe some kind of subisidies are on the card. If not the residents going to market will just have to pay for the additional cost, all because of nothing but Sheng Siong taking over the wet market. And now it is market forces at work, for the good of the people. We need to erect an altar for market forces and pray to it everyday. The god of market forces need to be respected and prayed to for the well being of the people. Bow three times at the altar and three times a day, morning, noon and evening.