The Ghost of BW Resources: The Bursting of the Philippine Gaming Stock Bubble

An inflation tends to demoralize those who gain by it as well as those who lose by it. They become used to “unearned increment.” They want to hold on to their rela­tive gains. Those who have made money from speculation prefer to continue this way of making money to the former method of working for it…The trend in an inflation is toward less work and produc­tion, more speculation and gam­bling—Henry Hazlitt

In this issue: 

The Ghost of BW Resources: The Bursting of the Philippine Gaming Stock Bubble

I. Why Our Prescient Warning? Seven Disturbing Parallels

II. One: Gaming at the Core

III. Two: Distortions: Market Dominance and Turnover

IV. Three: Post-Crisis Timing

V. Four: Inflation and the Illusion of Prosperity

VI. Five: Prohibition, the Satirical Theater of Morality and Potential Political Controversies

VII. Six: The South Sea Parallel

VIII. Seven: Bull Traps and Secular Cycles

IX. Conclusion: Bubble Cycles: The Rhyming of History 

The Ghost of BW Resources: The Bursting of the Philippine Gaming Stock Bubble 

From BW Resources to PLUS and BLOOM: The Anatomy of a Gaming Stock Market Bubble Reborn, 7 disturbing parallels

I. Why Our Prescient Warning? Seven Disturbing Parallels 

At the peak of the euphoria surrounding the Philippine gambling bubble, I issued a subtle warning via tweet (x.com post): (Figure 1)

Figure 1

"Strange fascination with gaming bubbles. Has the Philippine financial community forgotten the BW Resources bubble, w/c soared in a bear market's 'bull-trap' phase & crashed in 1999, exposing unsustainability & 'manipulation?' Learn from history—recurring bubbles in market cycles"

Certainly, 2025 is not 1999. The economy, financial architecture, and technological landscape have evolved. The composition of the Phisix—now the PSEi 30—has changed. The circumstances behind the BW scandal were unique. 

Despite the passage of time and evolution of market instruments, a troubling déjà vu grips the Philippine financial landscape. The current gaming bubble echoes the BW Resources scandal with unsettling fidelity—both in structure and in consequence. 

Below are seven disturbing parallels that merit scrutiny, not dismissal. 

II. One: Gaming at the Core 

BW Resources began as an online bingo firm with a nationwide franchise. It was, fundamentally, a gaming enterprise. 

Today’s speculative darlings—Digiplus Interactive Corporation [PSE: PLUS] and Bloomberry Resorts Corporation [PSE: BLOOM]—are likewise gaming firms, riding a digital demand boom.

Figure 2

PLUS has enjoyed a windfall: retail sales surged 181% (YOY) year-on-year in 2024, while net income growth vaulted 207%. In Q1 2025, net income soared 110% to Php 4.2 billion. (Figure 2, topmost window) 

Riding on the coattails of PLUS, BLOOM—a relative newcomer to online gaming—launched its digital platform in April, coinciding with a sharp rally in its share price. The timing fueled market excitement, further amplifying speculative fervor toward the sector. 

III. Two: Distortions: Market Dominance and Turnover 

BW Resources once commanded a disproportionate share of market turnover. (Figure 2, middle graph) 

At its peak, its market cap eclipsed stalwarts like San Miguel and Ayala Corporation (Hamlin, 2000). 

In mid-June 2025, PLUS and BLOOM’s combined turnover reached over 20% of the mainboard. (Figure 2, lowest image) 

As the bubble began to deflate, their aggregate volume still accounted for 16.9% of June’s total. 

The collapse saw a further explosion in turnover: in June, PLUS plunged 48.15%, BLOOM fell 17.2%, and their combined turnover share spiked to 22.2%. PLUS alone captured 17.8% of weekly volume—33.3% on Friday alone! Astounding. 

The stunning magnitude of PLUS's volume share—a firm which used to be on the sidelines—suggests that this represents a corporate-specific boom-bust episode driven not by savings but by leverage. 

Remember that the banking system's credit portfolio stands at an all-time high, mostly powered by consumer credit. 

The spike in volume as PLUS shares collapsed may indicate ‘margin calls’ or the selling of other PSE-listed shares to bolster collateral backing leveraged PLUS positions. This could explain the PSEi 30's 1.13% drop last Friday. 

IV. Three: Post-Crisis Timing

Figure 3

BW Resources peaked and imploded in 1999, two years after the Asian Financial Crisis (AFC), when GDP contracted by 0.51% in 1998. (Figure 3, upper chart) 

The current bubble climaxed four years after the pandemic-induced recession of 2020, when GDP shrank by 9.6%. 

V. Four: Inflation and the Illusion of Prosperity 

The BW Scandal was a product of easy money-fueled inflation. 

Since peaking at 12.5% in 1994, the CPI headed downhill until the 9.4% spike in 1998, belatedly brought about by the AFC. The CPI dropped significantly to 6.1% in 1999 as the BW scandal unfolded. 

Similarly, CPI rose from 3.9% in 2021 to 6% in 2023, then plummeted to 3.2% in 2024. 

As the great economist Henry Hazlitt noted, 

"A vital function of the free market is to penalize inefficiency and misjudgment and to reward efficiency and good judgment. By distorting economic calculations and creating illusory profits, inflation will destroy this function. Because nearly everybody will seem to prosper, there will be all sorts of maladjustments and investments in the wrong lines. Honest work and sound production will tend to give way to speculation and gambling. There will be a deterioration in the quality of goods and services and in the real standard of living" (Hazlitt, 1969). [bold added] 

As Hazlitt warned, inflation distorts economic calculation, rewards speculation over production, and erodes real living standards. Despite disinflation, the purchasing power of the common tao continues to decline. 

Elevated self-rated poverty and hunger suggest a deteriorating standard of living. (Figure 3, middle and lowest panes) 

As a side note—and quite ironically—despite the falling rate of CPI, sentiment metrics such as self-rated poverty and hunger continue to trend upward, even in the face of recent declines. Consider this: the current environment operates under an easy money regime that has buoyed all-time highs in fiscal stimulus, near-record employment, unprecedented public debt, expanding bank credit, and systemic leverage. But what happens if this constellation of highs begins to unravel? 

Many turn to gambling not for leisure, but as a desperate attempt to bridge income gaps, service debt, and or as a coping mechanism—a form of psychological escapism from personal financial straits. 

In this prism, rising gaming revenues hardly represent economic progress, but rather a transfer from the vulnerable public to the house casino. 

VI. Five: Prohibition, the Satirical Theater of Morality and Potential Political Controversies 

The implosion of the BW Resources stock market bubble effectively opened a Pandora’s Box of political ramifications. It exposed systemic corruption, egregious stock market manipulation, and other conflicts of interest with connections reaching the highest echelons of power (Pascual and Lim, 2022). 

Following the contemporary political assault on Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators (POGO), political evangelists have opportunistically piggybacked on this sentiment, advocating for increasingly vocal and deeper prohibitions anchored on the supposed social sanctity or righteousness of a total ban on digital gambling. 

Yet the crackdown on POGOs appears entangled in deeper geopolitical currents—linked to Chinese interests under the previous administration and potentially reflecting the broader US–China hegemonic rivalry, made manifest through diverging diplomatic relations between alternating political regimes in the Philippines. 

Crucially, in a populist climate framed by social-democratic ideals, the magnitude of state intervention often becomes a currency of political capital—the larger the crackdown, the louder its resonance among voters. 

History repeats: the public once clamored to ban jueteng, which helped trigger People Power II and the ouster of President Joseph E. Estrada. Eventually, the state legalized it through STL under PCSO. 

Wikipedia notes: "One of the suggested reasons for legalization was to eliminate repeated corruption scandals... It has been compared to the tribulations in the United States regarding their prohibition of alcohol." 

Or rather, legalization signified the ‘nationalization’ of what was once a fragmented, decentralized, and implicitly local government (LGU) controlled shadow economy—effectively converting informal vice into formal state enterprise. 

In the same vein, one might ask: what became of the Philippine drug war, "Operation Tokhang"? 

Aside from the escalating calls for prohibition, will other political controversies emerge from this bubble bust? 

If history is a reliable compass, financial distortions often leave behind trails of corruption, regulatory compromise, and partisan leverage. The unraveling may reveal ties between speculative fervor and institutional patronage—suggesting that what began as financial exuberance could metastasize into yet another political saga. When markets deflate, the silence seldom lasts. 

Echoing the BW scandal, will malfeasance reemerge? As economic historian Charles Kindleberger once warned: "The propensity to swindle grows parallel with the propensity to speculate during a boom; the implosion of an asset price bubble always leads to the discovery of frauds and swindles" (Kindleberger & Aliber 2005) 

VII. Six: The South Sea Parallel

Figure 4 

While intense volume spikes amid a share collapse are associated with 'capitulation' or a theoretical ‘bottom,’ we harbor doubt that this is the case. 

From our humble perspective, whether a bounce occurs or not, the Philippine gaming bubble may have likely been pricked. 

PLUS’ chart, born of BSP’s easing cycle, evokes the South Sea Bubble of 1720—a spectacle of leverage, speculation, and political complicity. (Figure 4, upper and lower graphs) 

The South Sea Bubble was a major financial crisis that shook Britain in 1720, driven by wild speculation in the South Sea Company. The company had been granted a monopoly on trade with Spanish South America and took on a central role in managing the national debt by converting the King’s personal debt into the nation’s debt. Investors were drawn in by promises of immense profits. The company fueled the frenzy by allowing shareholders to borrow against their own South Sea stock as collateral, encouraging dangerous levels of leverage. The bubble was also part of a broader shift toward modern finance, including the creation of paper money and the rise of institutions like the Bank of England, which was established in 1694 to help manage government borrowing and stabilize the financial system. When confidence collapsed, share prices crashed, collateral became worthless, and forced liquidations deepened the ruin. The episode exposed corruption at the highest levels of government and business, leading to political fallout and reforms in financial regulation.  (Cwik, 2012) 

Isaac Newton, emblematic of intellectual prowess, became entangled in the bubble. After initially profiting, he reinvested heavily—and ultimately went broke. It’s often said the experience prompted him to declare: "I can calculate the motions of the heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people." (chart from Dr. Marc Faber) 

Ironically, Newton’s third law of motion—"for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction"—finds metaphorical resonance here: South Sea shares returned to their starting point, as did the illusions of prosperity they once inspired. 

VIII. Seven: Bull Traps and Secular Cycles

Figure 5 

The BW scandal unfolded and climaxed in 1999 during a "bull trap" in a secular bear market. Once exposed, the market plunged until its 2002 trough—where the next bull cycle began. (Figure 5, upper chart) 

Today, the bear market persists. A “bull trap” rally is being engineered through easy money, fiscal stimulus, market interventions, and statistical optics—all framed within a carefully curated Overton Window, reminiscent of the ‘easing cycle’ powered "bull trap" of Q3 2024, as exhibited by prevailing media headlines. (links here, here and here) (Figure 5, lower diagram, Figure 6, media images)

Figure 6

IX. Conclusion: Bubble Cycles: The Rhyming of History 

The bursting of the Philippine gaming bubble represents more than a mere market correction—it embodies the cyclical nature of speculative excess that has plagued financial markets throughout history. 

The parallels between today's gaming bubble and the BW Resources scandal of 1999 are symptomatic of deeper structural patterns in market psychology, monetary policy and political misdeeds and imbroglios. 

As Mark Twain allegedly observed, "History doesn't repeat itself, but it often rhymes." Beneath the veneer of technological advancement and regulatory sophistication, the fundamental drivers of speculation—easy money, leverage, political interventions and human greed—remain unchanged. 

For those who understand the pattern, the current gaming bubble's burst may indeed signal the end of the artificial "bull trap" and the resumption of the secular bear market that never truly ended. 

In the end, the house always wins—not just in gaming, but in the grander casino of speculative markets where bubbles, once formed, must eventually burst. 

Yet, the silence after bubbles burst is rarely permanent. It’s often the prelude to scapegoating, reform, or reinvention—sometimes all three.  

___

References 

Henry Hazlitt, Comments on Inflation, May 1960 Fee.org 

Kevin Hamlin, Confidence Game, Institutional Investor, August 1, 2000 

CLARENCE PASCUAL AND JOSEPH LIM Corruption and Weak Markets: The BW Resources Stock Market Scam, March 2022 UP Center for Integrative and Development Studies, cids.up.edu. ph 

Henry Hazlitt, Man vs. The Welfare State p. 133 Arlington House, 1969, Mises.org 

Wikipedia, Jueteng 

Kindleberger, Charles P., and Robert Z. Aliber. Manias, Panics, and Crashes: A History of Financial Crises. 5th ed., Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. Chapter 9. 

Paul F. Cwik, The South Sea Bubble, April 3, 2012, Mises.org

  

Politics Ruled The Market In 2009

``Looking back, policymakers of all stripes missed their opportunities to make tough but necessary decisions in 2009. And now 2010 just doesn’t have the feel of a year that will witness a lot of decisive policymaking. In Washington, the focus will turn to the 2010 elections. The Fed will worry about its reputation and independence. Fearing for their jobs and fearful of mistakes, timid will win over bold. Bubbles treasure timid.”-Doug Noland, Issues 2010

At the start of the year, a friend asked, where I thought the local stock market is headed for in 2010. When my reply wasn’t in a definitive, I was asked instead where I FELT the market would go. Not satisfied in dealing with matters most- an analysis of the risk reward tradeoffs-I was expected to reply in the reductio ad absurdum or a confirmation of a preconceived bias.

And this is why Warren Buffett’s pejorative of stock forecasters becomes a reality, ``We have long felt that the only value of stock forecasters is to make fortune-tellers look good”. That’s because it has been a propensity for the public to reduce the role of financial market investments into intuitive based pulsating adrenalin based fortune telling “punts”, i.e. the euphemism for gambling.

Well, in dealing with markets most people deserve their fate.

Making New Year’s projection would have been evident from our notes of late last year. You can check out Following The Money Trail: Inflation A Key Theme For 2010, where we argued that inflation will be a concern for the year or How The Surging Philippine Peso Reflects On Global Inflationism where we argued for the case of a stronger Peso and a higher Phisix.

Nevertheless while it is easy to say or to get wedded to the notion or be overwhelmed by the bias that the Phisix will likely be significantly higher and that the Peso might be materially stronger, we might fall into a Pollyannaish trap without taking into consideration of what might preclude this from happening.

Market Extraordinaire

For starters, one must realize that last year, hardly anything that operated in the markets seemed traditional or conventional. Said differently, the market sailed in uncharted waters.

The fundamental distinction from the tradition market behavior had been the extent of concerted and coordinated inflationism engaged by global governments.

Data provider and research outfit Trim Tabs recently decomposed the buyers of the latest rally in the US markets and found little proof of mass public participation (see figure 1).

Figure 1: Fool.com/Trim Tabs: Who’s Buying This Rally?

This is why the “desperately seeking normal” camp has utilized myriad justifications for declaring the market’s unsustainable trend, such as a low volume or sponsorship (John Hussman), low cash levels of mutual funds (Claus Vogt), or even worst cycle for dividends (Floyd Norris) [But unlike the others, Mr. Norris makes a spin that a sharp plunge in dividends may translate to a sharp recovery] to many other issues mostly focused on valuations (e.g. Vitaliy Katsenelson).

Little have these experts noticed that government policies of printing colossal waves of digital and paper money would have an impact to the markets, had to go somewhere or find something to exchange for and would affect the markets and the economy unevenly. One analyst even called “inflation” as “secondary” concern.

In short, the basic flaw wasn’t only to underestimate on money’s neutrality but to greatly discount the incentives of the policymakers that prompted for such policy actions.

Value Scale Of Authorities: Banking Gets The Priority

Importantly, the obvious policy priorities of global authorities, especially in the US have been to rescue and ensure the survival of its banking system. The US and European governments have spent and guaranteed some $15 trillion (Bloomberg) of commitments or liabilities! This signifies as more than two fifths of the combined economy.

For anyone to argue that these governments have been devoting their efforts to mitigating economic woes (such as unemployment) have severely been misjudging the scale of values of those in power.

And this also has been evident with a shift in the model of the banking system from one providing traditional “loan services” to a “Banker as Trader” business model, where major banks have seen profit windfall from arbitraging financial markets that have been heavily massaged by the US government.

In 5 Reasons Why The Recent Market Slump Is Not What Mainstream Expects, we have discussed why most of the financial markets have been dysfunctional to price market based risks.

We said that…

1. By manipulating the mortgage markets and US treasury markets with the explicit goal of lowering interest rates, in order to ease the pressures on property values and to mitigate the losses in the balance sheets of the banking system,

2. By working to steepen the yield curve, which allows for conducive and favorable trading spreads for banks to profit and to enhance maturity transformation aimed at bolstering lending, and

3. By providing the implicit guarantees on ‘Too Big To Fail’ banks or financial institutions, this essentially encourages the revival of the ‘animal spirits’ by fueling a run in the stock markets.

Let me add that by implementing quantitative easing programs, the US government has fundamentally been subsidizing her banks by absorbing the toxic assets of the banking system allowing for the cosmetic enhancements of their balance sheets.

Next, by juicing up the equity markets, the US government has attempted to unleash the “animal spirits” in order for the market to abet on the financing of equity to the capital dispossessed banking and financial industry.

And like hitting two birds with a single stone, such unprecedented scale of market manipulations attempts to paint a picture of recovery and allow for the redeployment of stashed capital at the expense of savers.

In other words, the incentives to manipulate the financial markets to attain stabilization of the banking system appear commandingly superior to any other concerns.

Ergo, the markets of 2009 behaved in terms of the impact from political policies, as we correctly predicted in November of 2008 [see Stock Market Investing: Will Reading Political Tea Leaves Be A Better Gauge?], and believe that such dynamics will remain in operation for 2010, as we asserted in Investment Is Now A Gamble On Politics.

How does the US government manipulate the stock market? Perhaps through the Presidential Working Group On Financial Markets, an ad hoc group created in March 18, 1988 via Executive Order 12631 by President Ronald Reagan “established explicitly in response to events in the financial markets”, possibly channeled through the S & P futures.

As Zero Hedge’s Tyler Durden suggests, ``One way to manipulate the stock market would be for the Fed or the Treasury to buy $20 billion, plus or minus, of S&P 500 stock futures each month for a year. Depending on margin levels, $20 billion per month would translate into at least $100 billion in notional buying power. Given the hugely oversold market early in March, not only would a new $100 billion per month of buying power have stopped stock prices from plunging, but it would have encouraged huge amounts of sideline cash to flow into equities to absorb the $300 billion in newly printed shares that have been sold since the start of April.”

Of course, manipulation of the stock market would be speculation on our part. But the underlying incentive seems credible enough to suggest that such conjecture could be for real.