Singapore vehicles can continue topping up on petrol in Johor, the Malaysian government said yesterday, ending days of uncertainty over whether it would implement a ban within 50km of the border.
The news came with the announcement of a 40 per cent hike in petrol prices from today.
Analysts say the move is a high-stakes gamble by Premier Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, who is fighting for his political survival. [Source:
StraitsStooge Times, 5 Jun 2008]
This move is so much better and much more intelligent.
Keeping the subsidies and implementing a ban on foreign cars would be stupidity in the highest order. First of all, keeping the subsidies at the previous level would be like not doing something about the ‘bleeding’ that comes out of an ever enlarging wound. Next, implementing a ban would be the equivalent of cutting off the transfusion of blood coming in to replenish the blood you lose. It would be suicidal.
Either way, the days of low oil prices are over and some people should just live with it. How is it acceptable that at one point of time petrol was actually cheaper than even drinking water in some places? Consider this, water is a necessity, and burning fuel in your car is actually a luxury.
It really amazes me that the Malaysian opposition make a big fuss over this and actually ask the BN gahmen to maintain the subsidies and tighten their belts. There are few gahmens in this world that need to tighten their belts – Singapore being one of them.
Finally, The Financial Times reports that Bear Stearns tried to do a refinancing deal with Singapore’s sovereign wealth fund Temasek just days before it was forced into the arms of JPMorgan Chase. Temasek is said to have declined to get involved for both practical and political reasons. [Source: HereIsTheCity 5 Jun 2008]
What practical and political reasons will stop the mighty Temasek in acquiring Bear Stearns, but didn’t stop them from investing in… UBS and Merryl Lynch, or even Shit Shin Corp? Perhaps there’s something about Bear Stearns we mere mortals didn’t know but Temasek does?
But with 20/20 hindsight, we mere mortals do know the fact that Bear Stearns was practically sold for a song to JP Morgan Chase. The original US$236 million deal sees Bear’s shares valued at US$2 each, and JP Morgan exchanging 0.05473 of each of its shares for every Bear share. At that point of time, Bear Stearns was valued at US$3.54bn based on its US$30-a-share price at the end of trading day.
I don’t know what Temasek was offered, but paying US$236 million for S$3.54 billion asset must have been a real bargain. In fact, even if we don’t look at Bear Stearns’ paper value, it’s building at 383 Madison in New York is worth US$1.2 billion! An almost US$1 billion worth in profits instantly. Now, the only real practical reason I can think of, for Temasek to walk away from this, is that the so-called ‘Federal Reserve’ did not agree to provide a $30 billion lifeline for the deal.
Anyway? If anyone had bought Bear Stearns shares off the market after the deal was announced, they would have made a bundle out of it as well. A week or two after the announcement of the deal, JP Morgan offered to sweeten the deal to US$10 a share! On that day itself, Bear Stearns shares hit US$11.25. In short, if you have bought the shares even at US$3, you would have made at least US$8 a piece.
Just try and imagine that if you had as much money as Temasek, and after you offered the crap deal at US$2 and bought a large bundle of the shares off the open market, you now say you will increase your bid to $10. Basically, you made some profits out of thin air, didn’t you?
Anyway, don’t flame me for all these, please! I have already said they are uneducated views. Is it a surprise if my views over these matters are well… wrong?
