Category: Politik

  • Singapore Inc Faces $12 Billion Debt Scramble

    Singapore Inc Faces $12 Billion Debt Scramble

    Singapore companies, highly exposed to slowing global trade and a lackluster commodity market, face a financing scramble in 2017, as more than US$12 billion of their bonds falls due and banks grow wary of lending to the resources sector.

    That could trigger more blood-letting in a market that has already seen some high-profile corporate defaults, such as oil services firm Swiber Holdings (SWBR.SI), which hit the skids in July and went into judicial management this month.

    It has also seen an increase in the number of bond issuers trying to renegotiate the terms of their credit to stay afloat, a disturbing signal in a market skewed to retail buyers and smaller issues subject to light scrutiny.

    Corporate leverage has risen to increasingly risky levels, according to credit analysts and investors, while banks are becoming more circumspect about extending financing as the quality of their loan books causes concern.

    Between now and the end of 2017, according to Reuters data, US$12.4 billion of bonds falls due, but corporate balance sheets in the city state are looking strained.

    A Reuters study of 228 non-financial companies’ half-year earnings shows that 74 had net debt more than five times their core profit, a level that usually prompts concern among credit analysts, and more than a third of that group were at least twice that level.

    “We had not seen Singapore dollar corporate defaults since 2009, but suddenly we see a pick-up in defaults in 2015-2016. This is a warning sign about a refinancing confidence crisis across many sectors, not just commodity-related ones,” said Raymond Chia, Head of Credit Research for Asia ex-Japan at Schroders Investment Management.

    LIGHT SCRUTINY

    The structure of Singapore’s capital markets has left them particularly vulnerable as global trade cools and Chinese growth slows. Commodities have been a mainstay after a frothy 2013 and 2014, and private banking has loomed large, fuelling smaller bond deals. In 2014, private banks accounted for almost half of investments into Singapore dollar corporate debt, a central bank report said last year.

    Their participation has helped encourage smaller issues that are not assessed by credit rating agencies and yet are targeted at private wealth investors, analysts say.

    “Their bond issues are also mostly unrated, so the layer of scrutiny provided by rating agencies is missing. Many of these deals were mispriced: they priced like investment grade even though they had high-yield profiles,” said Harsh Agarwal, Head of Asia Credit Research at Deutsche Bank.

    That is now changing – at considerable cost for firms. Property firm Oxley Holdings, whose short-term debt dwarfs its cash balance, according to its latest accounts, saw yields on its bonds due 2019 SGOXHL1119= jump 220 basis points to 7.5 percent in the past quarter.

    And banks, under pressure to increase provisions for bad loans, are pulling back from indebted sectors like real estate, commodities and oil and gas, which dominate Singapore’s outstanding S$53 billion ($38 billion) of local currency corporate bonds.

    Non-performing loans have risen at all Singapore’s three banks in the latest quarterly results, reflecting a decline in loan quality across sectors.

    “In the absence of further bank support, refinancing this debt may prove difficult, potentially leading to more defaults over the next year,” said Devinda Paranathanthri at UBS Wealth Management, which estimates S$18 billion of local currency denominated bonds are coming due over the next 18 months. Over a quarter are from sectors facing structural headwinds.

    The latest sign of strain has been an increase in borrowers asking bondholders to cut them some slack. Ezra Holdings (EZRA.SI), Rickmers Maritime (RIMT.SI), Otto Marine OTTO.SI and Marco Polo Marine (MAPM.SI) are just some of the companies that sought bondholder consent this year to loosen the conditions, or covenants, attached to their loans.

    “It will continue to be busy, but the question is whether loosening covenants will be adequate to give these companies the lifeline that they need,” said Kevin Wong, Singapore-based partner with law firm Linklaters.

    “There is a risk these consent solicitations may lead to full-blown debt restructurings.”

    ($1 = 1.3943 Singapore dollars)

     

    Source: Reuters

  • Abdilar Zamzuri: Speaking English Is A Must For Service Staff

    Abdilar Zamzuri: Speaking English Is A Must For Service Staff

    At the payment counter…

    Me: Do you have a gift wrapping service?

    Cashier stares blankly at me

    Me: Do you have a gift wrapping service? (gestures wrapping an item)

    Cashier looks lost: Master or Nets?

    Me: Nets. Wrap present, where? Can speak English?

    Cashier: Huh.. No.

    Me turns to another staff: Do you have a gift wrapping service?

    Other Staff: Level 2, Customer Service Counter.

    I understand that we have a lot of foreigners working here but really, I don’t think I’m the only one who’s faced such a problem.

    Frontline officers need to be adequately trained to he prepared to handle simple queries. After all, they are the face of the company, not the management.

    It is incidents such as this that leaves a bad taste and a bad impression. A happy and joyous occasion can easily and quickly change to be one that is quite the opposite.

     

    Source: Abdilar Zamzuri

  • Puak Houthi Tembak Peluru Berpandu Ke Arah Makkah, Perbuatan Dikutuk Keras

    Puak Houthi Tembak Peluru Berpandu Ke Arah Makkah, Perbuatan Dikutuk Keras

    Enam anggota Majlis Kerjasama Teluk (GCC) menerajui kutukan keras terhadap serangan peluru berpandu Khamis lalu (27 Okt) dilancarkan kumpulan militan Houthi Yaman ke kota suci Makkah.

    Saudi Gazette melaporkan GCC menyatakan serangan Houthi terhadap Makkah adalah “bukti penolakan mereka untuk mematuhi masyarakat antarabangsa dan keputusannya”.

    Menteri Ehwal Luar Amiriah Arab Bersatu (UAE) Sheikh Abdullah Bin Zayed, seorang anggota pakatan Arab dan GCC, menyalahkan Iran, yang menyokong Houthi.

    “Rejim Iran sedang menyokong kumpulan pengganas yang melancarkan roket ke Makkah. Adakah ini rejim Islam seperti yang didakwa?” katanya melalui Twitter.

    Bahrain juga mengutuk perkara itu semalam (28 Okt) melalui satu kenyataan dihantar ke Al Arabiya News Channel dengan menyatakan “menyasarkan tapak suci itu melambangkan penghinaan secara langsung kepada golongan Muslim merata dunia dan melahirkan kebencian dan jenayah agama bagi kumpulan militan.

    Qatar juga memberi respons dengan menyatakan pelancaran serangan peluru berpandu ke Makkah itu menghalang usaha untuk meleraikan krisis Yaman secara aman.

    Laporan Saudi Gazette menambah Majlis Shura Saudi turut mengutuk serangan peluru berpandu itu.

    Presiden majlis itu Sheikh Abdullah Al-Asheikh berkata serangan yang disokong ejen-ejen rejim Iran di Yaman adalah pencabulan kesucian Tempat Ibadah Allah.

    “Tindakan jenayah ini menyakiti perasaan lebih satu bilion Muslim merata dunia,” katanya sambil menambah tindakan sebegitu akan memperkukuhkan keazaman Kerajaan Arab Saudi itu untuk mengekang dan mengenal pasti sesiapa yang cuba untuk menyerang keselamatan negara dan rakyat negara itu.

    Pakatan Arab yang berjuang di Yaman menyatakan pada Khamis lalu bahawa ia memusnahkan peluru berpandu itu 65km dari bandar suci tersebut sebelum ia dapat menyebabkan sebarang kerosakan, dan membalas serangan itu di tapak pelancarannya di Yaman, menurut kenyataan tersebut yang ditukil Saudi Press Agency.

    Saudi Gazette menambah Houthi mengesahkan melancarkan peluru berpandu Burkan-1 ke Arab Saudi dalam satu kenyataan menerusi agensi medianya, tetapi menambah ia disasarkan ke Lapangan Terbang Antarabangsa King Abdulaziz di Jeddah.

    Source: Berita MediaCorp

  • How Have Ong Ye Kung And Ng Chee Meng Showed Themselves Worthy Of Promotion To Full Ministers?

    How Have Ong Ye Kung And Ng Chee Meng Showed Themselves Worthy Of Promotion To Full Ministers?

    Two new ministers, Ong Ye Kung and Ng Chee Meng ascended to heaven, pardon me, appointed ministers 1 year after they were elected MPs. What have they proven in that 1 year – nothing except the usual political obfuscation and motherhood speeches.

    The former can even be said to have failed first time round back in 2011 – only be reassigned to a shoo-in in 2015.

    Like many of the next generation ministers, unproven in a one for one in an election contest and within the PAP uncontested for the ministerial positions they have now been appointed to. From this, the overweening sense of entitlement springs.

    Well if you are an MP and especially if one who have serve 2 or more terms, would you not be mightily pissed off? This says service to the nation, ideas, hardwork for the constituents if that way inclined, ambitions for oneself, and fellow citizens, count for nothing so these products of the faux meritocracy based on nothing much more than a set of examination results get an automatic entrance to the cabinet.

    The party leader don’t seem even to deem necessary to address the MPs of the merits of these appointments. Forget that the annointed ones even feel the need to persuade the MPs they are deserving. To top it off, the anointed ones will chose the new Prime Minister and the MPs will just have to nod and agree.

    Woeful is our bunch of PAP MPs. What utter contempt. That’s what it means to be taken for granted. It is the consequence for being slavishly obedient and being unable or unwilling to stand out. Maybe that part-time job.is just too well paid. Maybe serving the nation is confused with being a nodding head.

    * Loyalty to party is a prerequisite to get selected but not to the extent of slavish obedience and lack of dissent. The PAP stands out for not having dissent, very unusual for politics involving alpha-males and queen bees. Or there is no public airing of dissent – also not good for understanding the choices before the nation.

    Facebook post by Chris Kuan

     

    Source: www.tremeritus.com

  • Chee Soon Juan: Results Show That Lee Hsien Loong Failed As PM

    Chee Soon Juan: Results Show That Lee Hsien Loong Failed As PM

    Public memory is short.

    That’s what the PAP is counting on to get through the economic difficulties that we’re rapidly sinking into. But forgetting the past is what will surely prolong our troubles.

    Our only hope of recovery is to remember the PAP’s past promises and figure out how and why it has failed to deliver on them.

    To do this, we have to go back to 2003 when Mr Lee Hsien Loong, then Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance, was given the task of heading the Economic Review Committee (ERC). We had just come out of the Asian financial crisis in 1997 and the dot.com-bubble burst in 2001.

    To assist him in the task, Mr Lee convened seven sub-committees and consulted more than 1,000 individuals to produce a roadmap to transform Singapore – within a 15-year time-frame – into a diversified economy “willing to take risks to create fresh businesses and blaze new paths to success”.

    By the end of the endeavour, he waxed poetic, “Singapore will have graduated into a knowledge-based, innovation-driven economy. We will be a trend-setting city-state, a creative and entrepreneurial society.”

    Now that the 15 years is nearly up, it is pertinent to ask what has been achieved. Apparently not much, according to Mr Lee himself. As he confessed this week: “We are feeling the pains of restructuring, but not yet seeing the dividends of our hard work.”

    (Actually, “we” are not feeling anything – Mr Lee continues to draw his princely salary regardless of how he performs whereas workers are facing retrenchments and wage cuts.)

    But no matter, Mr Lee insists that he is “pursuing all the right strategies” and is “confident that given time these strategies will work”.

    If these “right strategies” have produced little of consequence after 15 years – the economy, still addicted to cheap foreign labour, is anything but innovation-driven; productivity continues to be a drag on growth; our workers are the unhappiest lot in this part of the world and have been for years; income inequality remains one of the highest in the developed world; and the economy is anything but diverse (we rank 5th on the Crony-Capitalism Index) – should reason then not tell us that maybe it is time to consider ditching them and implement genuine reforms?

    The painful truth is that the outlook for this country has never been bleaker and, the PM’s blandishments notwithstanding, things will get worse under the PAP’s autocratic but directionless leadership. Many analysts have, in fact, expressed the fear that the current downturn will be protracted.

    But it wasn’t that Mr Lee did not know of the seriousness of the problems that our country faced. He acknowledged in the 2003 ERC report that the economy needed “major, fundamental changes, in strategies as well as mindsets”. To do this, he promised that “restructuring will speed up”.

    But time has proven the emptiness of that promise.

    For one thing, the PAP, through the Temasek Holdings of which PM Lee’s wife is CEO, still has its tentacles in every sector of the local economy. The massive political-corporate nexus has created a non-transparent, unaccountable and kiasi corporate bureaucracy that is anathema to a culture at one with creativity and risk-taking.

    Second, if Mr Lee’s call for a knowledge-based economy is real, then why is he hanging on to the decrepit practice of controlling the mass media?

    Third, if the intention is to “change mindsets”, then why are our workers still forbidden from independently organising themselves and our people prohibited from freely gathering and speaking up? Mindsets, if it needs to be said at all, cannot be changed by fiat.

    After a decade-and-a-half of the PAP’s experiment, the results are in and it is plain that Mr Lee’s attempt at economic restructuring has failed. The reasons are not hard to evince.

    The question that Singaporeans must ask is: How much more of Mr Lee’s “restructuring pains” must we endure before we are willing to change?

     

    Source: www.cheesoonjuan.com

deneme bonusu