Japan's soaring debt now more than 700 trillion yen
Japan's outstanding debt rose 4.9 percent from a year ago to a record 703 trillion yen as of March 31, the government said Friday.
At 1.4 times gross domestic product, Japan's public debt burden is the highest in the industrialized world. Per person, the government's liabilities total 5.5 million yen.
Japan's debt has risen in recent years despite cuts to the country's bloated public works budget, with the cost of caring for an aging population having climbed and an economic slump having squeezed tax revenue.
Deficit spending surged in the 1990s as the government poured cash into successive public works projects to boost the economy after the collapse of a real estate and stock market bubble. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi capped spending of this kind when he took office in 2001, arguing it was doing little to spur continued growth.
Still, the government plans to rely on bond issues to cover 44.6 percent of its budget for the current year through March 2005.
The Finance Ministry forecasts that fresh bond issues will total 36.6 trillion yen during the year, little changed from 36.45 trillion yen in the previous term. Analyst say, however, that Japan can hope for a boost in tax revenue this year due to an economic rebound powered by surging exports to China, among others.
The Japan Times: June 26, 2004
(C) All rights reserved
Monday, June 28, 2004
Sunday, June 27, 2004
Philippine Daily Inquirer on Jollibee's Tony Tancaktiong: This Jolly man deserves his 'langhap sarap' success
This Jolly man deserves his 'langhap sarap' success
Posted: 8:54 PM | Jun. 26, 2004
Margie Quimpo-Espino
Inquirer News Service
A FEW months ago, Jollibee Foods Corp. founder Tony Tan Caktiong was sitting beside a lady who was telling him about her meetings with top leaders like the Emperor of Japan and even President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.
He politely asked who the lady was and was told she was a Rockefeller in charge of the Foundation of one of the richest families in the US.
At that time, Tony Tan was in a bit of a quandary. Jollibee had become international food firm and had beaten McDonald's in the Phillippines as the number one hamburger chain in the country. Its overseas expansion had been set in place and its local acquisitions seem to be dominating in their respective niches.
Tan, whose family could not even afford to go to then, already had enough personal wealth to set him for life.
The problem was friends had been prodding to do more social works and a part of him wanted to do so.
But the Rockefeller heir told him, "If you focus on your business and you do good, that's charity because you employ people and you generate revenues for your country. People think that charity is just attending socio-civic activities and raising funds. If you do that and your business goes down, people will lose their jobs."
Tan says those words set him straight and although he can leave his job right not and not go hungry the rest of his life; and although his wife wants him to retire and enjoy their fruits of their 25 year labor, hanging his coat is still far from the 53-year-old's mind.
Entrepreneur of the year
Tan granted SundayBiz a rare one-hour interview recently. This came in the wake of his winning the 2004 World Entreprenuer of the Year award of Ernst and Young, one of the world's top accounting firms.
"It was shocking," says the chemical engineer graduate of UST of his feelings when the winner was announced. Jollibee bested 31 other entrepreneurs in the world including the US, Britain. Although Tan says they were not really told of their scores, he says the judges told him later that their decision was unanimous.
More surprising still was the stir the win created in the Philippines. Major newspapers (including the Inquirer) splashed their front pages with the story and a photo of a victorious Tan with his family.
"I was really surprised at the stir it created. My friends said it uplifted their spirits. And especially since this came in the wake of the win of Gerry Ablaza as Telecom CEO of Asia, and that student who won the speech contest, and before all these, Manny Pacquiao. . . "
Winning an international award was not really part of the vision of the Tan siblings when they set up a food venture 29 years ago. Although Tony says going international was.
Humble beginnings
Tony's beginnings are as humble as the lives of some of the people Jollibee serves everyday.
He is the second of seven siblings. His parents came from the Fujian province of China. His father was a cook in a Chinese temple. Which was why he and his siblings studied in a Buddhist school-the Philippine Sakya Academy. His father's employ was their ticket to getting an education. They were all given scholarships to study.
All of them did well in school and lack of money was not a hindrance to their getting top grades. Nor to enjoying life.
"We were poor but my mom did not make us feel we were. We had no new clothes but our clothes did not have holes. She made sure we did not beg. We could not afford going to movies so our enjoyment during weekends was going to Rizal Park and playing there. We did not have too much food but walang sayang (nothing was wasted). As a family, we did not feel poor. We managed to make ends meet."
When Tony was 11, his father was invited by a friend to set up a Chinese restaurant in Davao. The family packed their belongings and took a boat to the South.
By Grade 6 he was enrolled at the Davao Chinese High School where he finished secondary school. The restaurant did well. He and his brothers and sisters were made to help-just little things like bringing water to the customer. At times he admitted they created more mess than help but they all learned the restaurant business.
Tony had always excelled in math. He was among the top three best in Math in his school. His Math teacher told him, "If you want to pursue this and you want to go overseas, you go to school with a name."
He took his teacher's advice and took up engineering at the University of Sto. Tomas. He was the only one who studied in Manila. But plans of going abroad had to be shelved. He got married right after graduation and Tony says pressure to earn was immediately there.
Inheriting his father's entrepreneurial streak, Tony saw a poster in school about an ice cream parlor looking for franchisees. He decided to go into business. His father lent him the initial capital and he immediately set up two ice cream parlors-one in Cubao and the other in Quiapo.
Typical of Chinese families, his siblings went to Manila to help. He and his wife managed the Cubao branch while his brother and a sister handle Quiapo.
That was the era of the ice cream parlors-where families would have their chocolait parfaits or milkshakes, or the students would give their birthday treats.
Tony says the ice cream business did well. And being hands-on, they always talked to customers. "They would tell us, you know sometimes, we are hungry, we cannot just eat ice cream."
Guarded secret
The father's culinary talent came out in his children and Tony's sister had a good recipe for hamburgers. This was used and soon the sales of the burgers were outpacing ice cream.
Today this recipe remains a guarded secret. Only a few people in the company know and they are all required to sign a confidentiality agreement, according to Tony.
In 1978, the family decided to become a burger restaurant and changed its name to Jolly Bee from Magnolia Ice Cream House. After a few months, they shortened the name to Jollibee or happy bee with the animal symbolizing industriousness and spreading sweet things while moving around.
The choice of the word jolly is very appropriate to Tony who admits he rarely gets angry. "Mistakes don't make me angry but dishonesty does."
The bee has been working non-stop and today Jollibee has 467 branches with eight branches overseas including the US, Hong Kong and Brunei. It also has acquired other foods businesses-Chowking, Greenwich, Delifrance, Tom's Teriyaki and recently it acquired 85 percent of Yonghe, a fastfood chain in China with 91 branches.
In 1981, McDonald's the giant American burger chain, invaded Philippine shores. Tony says the US firm actually helped boost their business. Jollibee adjusted and adopted many of the systems of McDo.
Later on it adopted a two to one strategy-building two Jollibee outlets for every McDonald's branch. In 1981, Tony says they spent the whole year's profits on advertising.
What made him believe in marketing was observation. "I saw that all the big companies advertised. So I thought it must be right to do so."
But while they are ahead of McDo, he likens their competition to boxing, "McDonald's created competition and made us alert. We can't relax. The last punch can knock you down."
Asked how he has been affected by his success, Tony says "I enjoy it not in terms of money to spend but that I can create something."
He adds that the frugal yet comfortable lifestyle he had growing up has remained. And this has been acquired by two of his three children. And even her mother still expects the same conservative lifestyle.
"When we travel with my mom, and we book business, she'll complain. We tell her we want her to be comfortable but she replies that if she thinks of the additional expense she feels uncomfortable!"
His two children, who studied in the US, also complain if they are given business class tickets when they go home. His son who finished computer and business is now working in China; his eldest daughter has the desire to help people and is now teaching English in China. The youngest is still studying.
He can very well afford to buy the latest equipment for his new hobby-photography. His favorite genre is people. "I try to learn people but I don't have time!"
Tony admits raising of the children was left largely to his wife who had initially helped him in business. He says his wife still remains a valuable advisor in Jollibee although she no longer gets involved in the day to day operations.
On the whole, Tony says they were quite lucky at the growth Jollibee achieved. There is really no secret except taking to heart what his father told him decades ago, "If you're a tailor you make sure the shirt fits your client; if you're in the restaurant business, you make sure your food tastes good."
This is the secret of Jollibee-better tasting burgers and extremely crunchy chickenjoy (which actually sells more than the burger) than the relatively bland taste of its competiors. Thus the phrase "langhapsarap" has endured for over 20 years now.
copyright ©2004 INQ7money.net all rights reserved
The Prudent Investor: Not only is Mr. Tan reaping raves and plaudits in the media; in the stock market Jollibee shares are being propelled by foreign and local investors to new heights, as testament to Jollibee and Mr. Tancaktiong's success. Indeed, a toast for Mr. Tan!
Posted: 8:54 PM | Jun. 26, 2004
Margie Quimpo-Espino
Inquirer News Service
A FEW months ago, Jollibee Foods Corp. founder Tony Tan Caktiong was sitting beside a lady who was telling him about her meetings with top leaders like the Emperor of Japan and even President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.
He politely asked who the lady was and was told she was a Rockefeller in charge of the Foundation of one of the richest families in the US.
At that time, Tony Tan was in a bit of a quandary. Jollibee had become international food firm and had beaten McDonald's in the Phillippines as the number one hamburger chain in the country. Its overseas expansion had been set in place and its local acquisitions seem to be dominating in their respective niches.
Tan, whose family could not even afford to go to then, already had enough personal wealth to set him for life.
The problem was friends had been prodding to do more social works and a part of him wanted to do so.
But the Rockefeller heir told him, "If you focus on your business and you do good, that's charity because you employ people and you generate revenues for your country. People think that charity is just attending socio-civic activities and raising funds. If you do that and your business goes down, people will lose their jobs."
Tan says those words set him straight and although he can leave his job right not and not go hungry the rest of his life; and although his wife wants him to retire and enjoy their fruits of their 25 year labor, hanging his coat is still far from the 53-year-old's mind.
Entrepreneur of the year
Tan granted SundayBiz a rare one-hour interview recently. This came in the wake of his winning the 2004 World Entreprenuer of the Year award of Ernst and Young, one of the world's top accounting firms.
"It was shocking," says the chemical engineer graduate of UST of his feelings when the winner was announced. Jollibee bested 31 other entrepreneurs in the world including the US, Britain. Although Tan says they were not really told of their scores, he says the judges told him later that their decision was unanimous.
More surprising still was the stir the win created in the Philippines. Major newspapers (including the Inquirer) splashed their front pages with the story and a photo of a victorious Tan with his family.
"I was really surprised at the stir it created. My friends said it uplifted their spirits. And especially since this came in the wake of the win of Gerry Ablaza as Telecom CEO of Asia, and that student who won the speech contest, and before all these, Manny Pacquiao. . . "
Winning an international award was not really part of the vision of the Tan siblings when they set up a food venture 29 years ago. Although Tony says going international was.
Humble beginnings
Tony's beginnings are as humble as the lives of some of the people Jollibee serves everyday.
He is the second of seven siblings. His parents came from the Fujian province of China. His father was a cook in a Chinese temple. Which was why he and his siblings studied in a Buddhist school-the Philippine Sakya Academy. His father's employ was their ticket to getting an education. They were all given scholarships to study.
All of them did well in school and lack of money was not a hindrance to their getting top grades. Nor to enjoying life.
"We were poor but my mom did not make us feel we were. We had no new clothes but our clothes did not have holes. She made sure we did not beg. We could not afford going to movies so our enjoyment during weekends was going to Rizal Park and playing there. We did not have too much food but walang sayang (nothing was wasted). As a family, we did not feel poor. We managed to make ends meet."
When Tony was 11, his father was invited by a friend to set up a Chinese restaurant in Davao. The family packed their belongings and took a boat to the South.
By Grade 6 he was enrolled at the Davao Chinese High School where he finished secondary school. The restaurant did well. He and his brothers and sisters were made to help-just little things like bringing water to the customer. At times he admitted they created more mess than help but they all learned the restaurant business.
Tony had always excelled in math. He was among the top three best in Math in his school. His Math teacher told him, "If you want to pursue this and you want to go overseas, you go to school with a name."
He took his teacher's advice and took up engineering at the University of Sto. Tomas. He was the only one who studied in Manila. But plans of going abroad had to be shelved. He got married right after graduation and Tony says pressure to earn was immediately there.
Inheriting his father's entrepreneurial streak, Tony saw a poster in school about an ice cream parlor looking for franchisees. He decided to go into business. His father lent him the initial capital and he immediately set up two ice cream parlors-one in Cubao and the other in Quiapo.
Typical of Chinese families, his siblings went to Manila to help. He and his wife managed the Cubao branch while his brother and a sister handle Quiapo.
That was the era of the ice cream parlors-where families would have their chocolait parfaits or milkshakes, or the students would give their birthday treats.
Tony says the ice cream business did well. And being hands-on, they always talked to customers. "They would tell us, you know sometimes, we are hungry, we cannot just eat ice cream."
Guarded secret
The father's culinary talent came out in his children and Tony's sister had a good recipe for hamburgers. This was used and soon the sales of the burgers were outpacing ice cream.
Today this recipe remains a guarded secret. Only a few people in the company know and they are all required to sign a confidentiality agreement, according to Tony.
In 1978, the family decided to become a burger restaurant and changed its name to Jolly Bee from Magnolia Ice Cream House. After a few months, they shortened the name to Jollibee or happy bee with the animal symbolizing industriousness and spreading sweet things while moving around.
The choice of the word jolly is very appropriate to Tony who admits he rarely gets angry. "Mistakes don't make me angry but dishonesty does."
The bee has been working non-stop and today Jollibee has 467 branches with eight branches overseas including the US, Hong Kong and Brunei. It also has acquired other foods businesses-Chowking, Greenwich, Delifrance, Tom's Teriyaki and recently it acquired 85 percent of Yonghe, a fastfood chain in China with 91 branches.
In 1981, McDonald's the giant American burger chain, invaded Philippine shores. Tony says the US firm actually helped boost their business. Jollibee adjusted and adopted many of the systems of McDo.
Later on it adopted a two to one strategy-building two Jollibee outlets for every McDonald's branch. In 1981, Tony says they spent the whole year's profits on advertising.
What made him believe in marketing was observation. "I saw that all the big companies advertised. So I thought it must be right to do so."
But while they are ahead of McDo, he likens their competition to boxing, "McDonald's created competition and made us alert. We can't relax. The last punch can knock you down."
Asked how he has been affected by his success, Tony says "I enjoy it not in terms of money to spend but that I can create something."
He adds that the frugal yet comfortable lifestyle he had growing up has remained. And this has been acquired by two of his three children. And even her mother still expects the same conservative lifestyle.
"When we travel with my mom, and we book business, she'll complain. We tell her we want her to be comfortable but she replies that if she thinks of the additional expense she feels uncomfortable!"
His two children, who studied in the US, also complain if they are given business class tickets when they go home. His son who finished computer and business is now working in China; his eldest daughter has the desire to help people and is now teaching English in China. The youngest is still studying.
He can very well afford to buy the latest equipment for his new hobby-photography. His favorite genre is people. "I try to learn people but I don't have time!"
Tony admits raising of the children was left largely to his wife who had initially helped him in business. He says his wife still remains a valuable advisor in Jollibee although she no longer gets involved in the day to day operations.
On the whole, Tony says they were quite lucky at the growth Jollibee achieved. There is really no secret except taking to heart what his father told him decades ago, "If you're a tailor you make sure the shirt fits your client; if you're in the restaurant business, you make sure your food tastes good."
This is the secret of Jollibee-better tasting burgers and extremely crunchy chickenjoy (which actually sells more than the burger) than the relatively bland taste of its competiors. Thus the phrase "langhapsarap" has endured for over 20 years now.
copyright ©2004 INQ7money.net all rights reserved
The Prudent Investor: Not only is Mr. Tan reaping raves and plaudits in the media; in the stock market Jollibee shares are being propelled by foreign and local investors to new heights, as testament to Jollibee and Mr. Tancaktiong's success. Indeed, a toast for Mr. Tan!
Solita Monsod: Simple Arithmetic
Simple arithmetic
Posted:9:35 PM (Manila Time) | Jun. 25, 2004
By Solita Collas-Monsod
MEMBERS of the FPJ/Angara faction of the opposition (as distinguished from the Lacson faction) joined by all the knee-jerk Gloria-hating crowd (e.g., Sanlakas), plus some of the losers who are trying to justify their poor showing (e.g. Eddie Villanueva), have repeated their charges of "massive fraud" so often that they are beginning to believe it themselves.
That is no problem. What is disturbing is that people of good will who did not have the time to monitor the canvassing and who just hear the sound bites are also expressing doubts about the validity of the Macapagal victory.
The opposition's most telling blow is the "they (the majority)-wouldn't-even-allow-one-single-Election-Return-to-be-examined" complaint, which hits two birds with one stone: It casts the majority as tyrants and as hiders of truth. Milking the issue, comparisons were drawn (with an implied threat) between the refusal to open the ERs and the refusal to "open the envelope" during the Estrada impeachment trial.
It was so effective that it erased from the memories of otherwise thinking men and women the surveys conducted by opinion research firms with proven track records showing Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo trailing at first, then gaining, then pulling ahead, and finally winning (in the exit polls).
Thus, you have Walden Bello saying that while his original opinion was that Gloria had won, his suspicions were aroused by the majority's refusal to open "just three" ERs (he meant, of course, the ERs of three provinces). And others asking, what is wrong with opening these ERs if it means getting to the truth? Why hide behind technicalities?
Let's look at the issues. First is the comparison between the refusal to open the ERs and the refusal to open the Estrada envelope. That is an odious one, and entirely without basis. In the impeachment case, the contents of the envelope were a mystery to everyone. With the ERs, the parties concerned--the Comelec, the majority coalition, the dominant opposition, the citizen's arm--had access to their contents. By law, they get a copy of every document in the counting process. Not only were the ERs available for inspection at the precinct level, they could have been questioned and the counts corrected at the municipal level and then at the provincial level. In effect, the opposition had three opportunities to examine those ERs, complain and have the counts corrected. The truth was there for them to pursue.
Maybe their watchers and lawyers were sleeping on the job or incompetent. But, they argue, this should not result in the Filipino voters being "punished" by the victory of a candidate who "did not really win." What is wrong with opening these ERs one more time in the interest of truth?
Opening the ERs of three provinces seems eminently reasonable; after all, the original opposition demand was to examine all the ERs, which was scaled down to the ERs of 25 provinces, and finally to three.
Let's do some arithmetic to appreciate what is involved in examining those ERs. Start with 216,000 ERs in the country. Divide by 102 (provinces and cities with Certificates of Canvass; the rest of the 177 CoCs were from abroad with one percent of the votes). Rounding off, we get an average of 2,000 ERs per province.
Assume six minutes to examine each ER, an assumption which may be a gross underestimation. Multiply 6 minutes by 2,000 ERs and you have 12,000 minutes. For one province. That is equal to 200 hours. Thus it will take, on the average, 200 hours to examine one province's ERs. How many days? If you are talking of a 24-hour day, with no rest periods, that is 8.3 days. A more reasonable (but still unrealistic) 12-hour day means 16.7 days per province.
Now multiply that by three, and we realize that to examine the ERs of three provinces will take at least 50 days or seven weeks (working seven days a week) to eight weeks (working six days a week). And that time doesn't allow for any but the most cursory examination of the ERs.
That period would extend beyond June 30. The terms of office of the legislators would have expired, except for 12 senators, and the new Congress does not convene until the third week of July.
Let's not even go that far. It turns out (per Romy Makalintal, election lawyer par excellence) that the number of ERs for which the opposition seemed to have some evidence of irregularities totaled--is the reader ready for this?--1,390. Yes, Virginia, all that ranting and raving of someone like JV Bautista was actually, as Makalintal described it, nothing but "kuwentong kutsero (barbershop talk)." There were only 1,390 questionable ERs out of 216,000. Does that constitute "massive fraud"?
Would it have materially affected the results? Let's do some more arithmetic. Say that the number of questionable ERs was actually 2,000, instead of 1,390. On the average, precincts have 200 voters. Assume that all the votes in those ERs were for FPJ, zero for Ms Macapagal. That means 400,000 (2,000 ERs x 200 voters) votes more for FPJ and 400,000 votes less for Ms Macapagal or an 800,000 vote swing.
She won by more than 1.1 million votes. Which means that those questioned ERs would not have materially changed the results. It would be very close, but Ms Macapagal would still be the winner. Which was why they did not need to be opened for purposes of the canvassing.
No conspiracy. No tyranny. No cover-up. Just the plain, bald truth, and some simple arithmetic.
©2004 www.inq7.net all rights reserved
The Prudent Investor: As Monsod shows us, all the fuss about the CoC's is simply an argument of rhetorics vs. plain commonsense. Unfortunately a lot of us fall prey to the former's appeal to the emotions 'argumentum ad populum' rather than the latter. Emotions have clouded alot of people's reasoning out of political partisanship yet plain commonsense is the rudimentary requirement for us Filipinos to succeed.
Posted:9:35 PM (Manila Time) | Jun. 25, 2004
By Solita Collas-Monsod
MEMBERS of the FPJ/Angara faction of the opposition (as distinguished from the Lacson faction) joined by all the knee-jerk Gloria-hating crowd (e.g., Sanlakas), plus some of the losers who are trying to justify their poor showing (e.g. Eddie Villanueva), have repeated their charges of "massive fraud" so often that they are beginning to believe it themselves.
That is no problem. What is disturbing is that people of good will who did not have the time to monitor the canvassing and who just hear the sound bites are also expressing doubts about the validity of the Macapagal victory.
The opposition's most telling blow is the "they (the majority)-wouldn't-even-allow-one-single-Election-Return-to-be-examined" complaint, which hits two birds with one stone: It casts the majority as tyrants and as hiders of truth. Milking the issue, comparisons were drawn (with an implied threat) between the refusal to open the ERs and the refusal to "open the envelope" during the Estrada impeachment trial.
It was so effective that it erased from the memories of otherwise thinking men and women the surveys conducted by opinion research firms with proven track records showing Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo trailing at first, then gaining, then pulling ahead, and finally winning (in the exit polls).
Thus, you have Walden Bello saying that while his original opinion was that Gloria had won, his suspicions were aroused by the majority's refusal to open "just three" ERs (he meant, of course, the ERs of three provinces). And others asking, what is wrong with opening these ERs if it means getting to the truth? Why hide behind technicalities?
Let's look at the issues. First is the comparison between the refusal to open the ERs and the refusal to open the Estrada envelope. That is an odious one, and entirely without basis. In the impeachment case, the contents of the envelope were a mystery to everyone. With the ERs, the parties concerned--the Comelec, the majority coalition, the dominant opposition, the citizen's arm--had access to their contents. By law, they get a copy of every document in the counting process. Not only were the ERs available for inspection at the precinct level, they could have been questioned and the counts corrected at the municipal level and then at the provincial level. In effect, the opposition had three opportunities to examine those ERs, complain and have the counts corrected. The truth was there for them to pursue.
Maybe their watchers and lawyers were sleeping on the job or incompetent. But, they argue, this should not result in the Filipino voters being "punished" by the victory of a candidate who "did not really win." What is wrong with opening these ERs one more time in the interest of truth?
Opening the ERs of three provinces seems eminently reasonable; after all, the original opposition demand was to examine all the ERs, which was scaled down to the ERs of 25 provinces, and finally to three.
Let's do some arithmetic to appreciate what is involved in examining those ERs. Start with 216,000 ERs in the country. Divide by 102 (provinces and cities with Certificates of Canvass; the rest of the 177 CoCs were from abroad with one percent of the votes). Rounding off, we get an average of 2,000 ERs per province.
Assume six minutes to examine each ER, an assumption which may be a gross underestimation. Multiply 6 minutes by 2,000 ERs and you have 12,000 minutes. For one province. That is equal to 200 hours. Thus it will take, on the average, 200 hours to examine one province's ERs. How many days? If you are talking of a 24-hour day, with no rest periods, that is 8.3 days. A more reasonable (but still unrealistic) 12-hour day means 16.7 days per province.
Now multiply that by three, and we realize that to examine the ERs of three provinces will take at least 50 days or seven weeks (working seven days a week) to eight weeks (working six days a week). And that time doesn't allow for any but the most cursory examination of the ERs.
That period would extend beyond June 30. The terms of office of the legislators would have expired, except for 12 senators, and the new Congress does not convene until the third week of July.
Let's not even go that far. It turns out (per Romy Makalintal, election lawyer par excellence) that the number of ERs for which the opposition seemed to have some evidence of irregularities totaled--is the reader ready for this?--1,390. Yes, Virginia, all that ranting and raving of someone like JV Bautista was actually, as Makalintal described it, nothing but "kuwentong kutsero (barbershop talk)." There were only 1,390 questionable ERs out of 216,000. Does that constitute "massive fraud"?
Would it have materially affected the results? Let's do some more arithmetic. Say that the number of questionable ERs was actually 2,000, instead of 1,390. On the average, precincts have 200 voters. Assume that all the votes in those ERs were for FPJ, zero for Ms Macapagal. That means 400,000 (2,000 ERs x 200 voters) votes more for FPJ and 400,000 votes less for Ms Macapagal or an 800,000 vote swing.
She won by more than 1.1 million votes. Which means that those questioned ERs would not have materially changed the results. It would be very close, but Ms Macapagal would still be the winner. Which was why they did not need to be opened for purposes of the canvassing.
No conspiracy. No tyranny. No cover-up. Just the plain, bald truth, and some simple arithmetic.
©2004 www.inq7.net all rights reserved
The Prudent Investor: As Monsod shows us, all the fuss about the CoC's is simply an argument of rhetorics vs. plain commonsense. Unfortunately a lot of us fall prey to the former's appeal to the emotions 'argumentum ad populum' rather than the latter. Emotions have clouded alot of people's reasoning out of political partisanship yet plain commonsense is the rudimentary requirement for us Filipinos to succeed.
CBS Marketwatch: Gold tallies a nearly $8 weekly gain
Gold tallies a nearly $8 weekly gain
By Myra P. Saefong, CBS.MarketWatch.com
Last Update: 4:24 PM ET June 25, 2004
SAN FRANCISCO (CBS.MW) -- Gold futures posted a modest loss Friday but logged a gain of nearly $8 an ounce for the week.
Gold for August delivery closed at $403.20 an ounce, down 30 cents for the New York Mercantile Exchange session. It was up $7.50, or 1.9 percent, from last week's $395.70.
Thursday's gain was the reason for the weekly advance, with prices closing near $404 in racking up a 2 percent gain to end at its highest level since mid-April. See the latest futures prices.
"The market may have overreacted with [Thursday's] price gain -- it is overbought," said John Person, head analyst at Infinity Brokerage Services, adding that traders were more prone to "take money off the table" ahead of the Federal Reserve's expected decision next week to raise interest rates by a quarter-point.
Still, "buyers may come back in the market if [gold] demonstrates strength by forging to higher levels," he added. See more of comments.External factors may also lead to further gains. "Considering the geopolitical and economic backdrop, the short-term bias for gold is up," said Brien Lundin, editor of Gold Newsletter.
Dollar dictates
Friday's strength in the U.S. dollar, following sharp declines in the previous session, also helped ease investment demand for the precious metals. See Currencies.
The dollar's rebound came despite news that the U.S. economy grew at an annual rate of 3.9 percent in the first quarter, slower than the 4.4 percent growth rate previously estimated, according to the Commerce Department. The downward revision to GDP was unexpected. See full story.
Other metals futures also closed lower on Nymex. The July silver contract closed at $6.127 per ounce, down 4.8 cents. It still closed above the week-ago close of $5.982.
July copper shed 1.4 cents to close at $1.2095 per pound, modestly higher than the week-ago close of $1.1925.
September palladium fell $2.70 to end at $227.20 an ounce, while July platinum lost $6.50 to close at $806.50 an ounce. Both contracts closed below the levels they closed at a week ago.
Supplies of copper, silver and gold were lower as of late Wednesday, according to Nymex data.
Copper supplies were down 2,084 short tons at 103,256 short tons. Silver stocks were down 9,984 troy ounces at 117.7 million troy ounces. Gold inventories stood at 4.21 million troy ounces, down 182,818 troy ounces from the previous day.
A more recent update on supplies wasn't available on the exchange's Web site.
'Erratic' week to come
Traders are also wary ahead of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization summit that starts this weekend in Istanbul and continues into the coming week, said Frederic Panizzutti, a gold analyst at MKS Finance in Geneva.
"Istanbul was supposed to be at its highest threat level, but still terrors [acts are] possible," he said. "The situation is expected to remain critical over the coming few days, and it seems very likely that some further safe-heaven gold buying will be seen over the coming days," he said.
Given all that, "markets are expected to be very volatile and erratic next week," he warned.
Gold Newsletter's Lundin argued, however, that a correction in prices expected after the Fed's likely announced of a rate hike next week has already occurred.
"In fact, the market has at this point discounted more severe interest rate increases, and we are very likely to see a relief rally in gold upon the Fed's announcement," he said.
Mining shares little changed
Mining shares closed little changed Friday, but indexes ended the week with a gain.
"Whether it is next week, next month or early next year, the current price of gold and the current levels for mining and exploration stocks will be considered bargains," said Lundin.
A 1.7 percent retreat in shares of Apex Silver Mines (SIL: news, chart, profile) led the Philadelphia Gold and Silver Index ($XAU: news, chart, profile) lower by 0.1 percent to close at 88.44. For the week, it was up 2.9 percent.
The CBOE Gold Index ($GOX: news, chart, profile) rose slightly, adding 0.1 percent to close at 79.49. It was up 3.5 percent for the week. And the Amex Gold Bugs Index (HUI: news, chart, profile) closed at 194.25, up 0.2 percent for the session and up 2.6 percent for the week.
The indexes had closed out Thursday's action at their highest levels in at least two weeks.
Myra P. Saefong is a reporter for CBS.MarketWatch.com in San Francisco.
By Myra P. Saefong, CBS.MarketWatch.com
Last Update: 4:24 PM ET June 25, 2004
SAN FRANCISCO (CBS.MW) -- Gold futures posted a modest loss Friday but logged a gain of nearly $8 an ounce for the week.
Gold for August delivery closed at $403.20 an ounce, down 30 cents for the New York Mercantile Exchange session. It was up $7.50, or 1.9 percent, from last week's $395.70.
Thursday's gain was the reason for the weekly advance, with prices closing near $404 in racking up a 2 percent gain to end at its highest level since mid-April. See the latest futures prices.
"The market may have overreacted with [Thursday's] price gain -- it is overbought," said John Person, head analyst at Infinity Brokerage Services, adding that traders were more prone to "take money off the table" ahead of the Federal Reserve's expected decision next week to raise interest rates by a quarter-point.
Still, "buyers may come back in the market if [gold] demonstrates strength by forging to higher levels," he added. See more of comments.External factors may also lead to further gains. "Considering the geopolitical and economic backdrop, the short-term bias for gold is up," said Brien Lundin, editor of Gold Newsletter.
Dollar dictates
Friday's strength in the U.S. dollar, following sharp declines in the previous session, also helped ease investment demand for the precious metals. See Currencies.
The dollar's rebound came despite news that the U.S. economy grew at an annual rate of 3.9 percent in the first quarter, slower than the 4.4 percent growth rate previously estimated, according to the Commerce Department. The downward revision to GDP was unexpected. See full story.
Other metals futures also closed lower on Nymex. The July silver contract closed at $6.127 per ounce, down 4.8 cents. It still closed above the week-ago close of $5.982.
July copper shed 1.4 cents to close at $1.2095 per pound, modestly higher than the week-ago close of $1.1925.
September palladium fell $2.70 to end at $227.20 an ounce, while July platinum lost $6.50 to close at $806.50 an ounce. Both contracts closed below the levels they closed at a week ago.
Supplies of copper, silver and gold were lower as of late Wednesday, according to Nymex data.
Copper supplies were down 2,084 short tons at 103,256 short tons. Silver stocks were down 9,984 troy ounces at 117.7 million troy ounces. Gold inventories stood at 4.21 million troy ounces, down 182,818 troy ounces from the previous day.
A more recent update on supplies wasn't available on the exchange's Web site.
'Erratic' week to come
Traders are also wary ahead of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization summit that starts this weekend in Istanbul and continues into the coming week, said Frederic Panizzutti, a gold analyst at MKS Finance in Geneva.
"Istanbul was supposed to be at its highest threat level, but still terrors [acts are] possible," he said. "The situation is expected to remain critical over the coming few days, and it seems very likely that some further safe-heaven gold buying will be seen over the coming days," he said.
Given all that, "markets are expected to be very volatile and erratic next week," he warned.
Gold Newsletter's Lundin argued, however, that a correction in prices expected after the Fed's likely announced of a rate hike next week has already occurred.
"In fact, the market has at this point discounted more severe interest rate increases, and we are very likely to see a relief rally in gold upon the Fed's announcement," he said.
Mining shares little changed
Mining shares closed little changed Friday, but indexes ended the week with a gain.
"Whether it is next week, next month or early next year, the current price of gold and the current levels for mining and exploration stocks will be considered bargains," said Lundin.
A 1.7 percent retreat in shares of Apex Silver Mines (SIL: news, chart, profile) led the Philadelphia Gold and Silver Index ($XAU: news, chart, profile) lower by 0.1 percent to close at 88.44. For the week, it was up 2.9 percent.
The CBOE Gold Index ($GOX: news, chart, profile) rose slightly, adding 0.1 percent to close at 79.49. It was up 3.5 percent for the week. And the Amex Gold Bugs Index (HUI: news, chart, profile) closed at 194.25, up 0.2 percent for the session and up 2.6 percent for the week.
The indexes had closed out Thursday's action at their highest levels in at least two weeks.
Myra P. Saefong is a reporter for CBS.MarketWatch.com in San Francisco.
Friday, June 25, 2004
June 25 Philippine Stock Market Review; Jollibee and Oil Issues
Three of the blue chips or major index heavyweights buoyed today’s trading activities leading the Philippine benchmark index, the Phisix, to close slightly higher by 5.74 points or .36%. PLDT (+1.33%), SM Primeholdings (+1.69%) and San Miguel B (+.68%) were largely responsible for lifting the index, as Bank of the Philippine Islands being the sole decliner, down by 1.16%, with the rest (Globe, San Miguel A, Ayala Land, Ayala Corp and Metrobank), closing unchanged. Over the week the Phisix is up by a hefty 3.05%.
Overseas investors were net buyers today, accumulating P 47.560 million worth of equity assets. Aside from the key telecom issues, it seems that investors abroad took heavy positions in Jollibee (+2.04%), which for today, posted the largest amount of net capital inflows. Jollibee has been on a winning streak, since coincidentally, Mr. Tony Tancaktiong, Jollibee’s head huncho took home the prized 2004 World Entrepreneur of the year award in May 29, 2004, held at Monte Carlo Monaco. Jollibee share prices are up 21.95% since May 28 and have attracted P 85.362 million of foreign money or 39.92% of the company’s accrued turnover during the said period. So aside from being blessed with a prestigious global award, Mr. Tancaktiong is likewise being rewarded by a vote of confidence from overseas and local investors. A case of hitting two birds with one stone.
Oil issues took a drubbing today on probable ‘profit taking’. After a sizable climb over the past weeks due to oil drilling speculations, the oil index plummeted 11.63% weighed down by index heavyweights Oriental Petroleum, which fell 16.66% for the foreign shares and 12.72% for the domestic shares. Perhaps what the prompted the fall was Basic Consolidated’s disclosure that it had assigned 1.45425% of its 4.155% share in the Zebra-1 and Rhino-1 wells, which means Basic’s share to the project will be reduced to 2.70%. Basic Consolidated was the second largest day loser plunging by 15.21%. Basic opened the day’s trading gap down, eventually dragging along Oriental Petroleum shares.
Today’s action by investors on Basic Consolidated was quite bizarre. It is as if the recent price of Basic presumed cash flows from an EXISTING commercially producing oil well such that a reduction in its share in the drilling project would mean greatly reduced revenues, hence the logical fall in prices. But what seems to be lost among the local investors is that oil HAS YET to be found, hence the prices of Basic Consolidated has not yet factored in cash flows from the oil well simply because these have yet to be ascertained.
The recent spike in these issues means that investors were positioning for a possible oil discovery. If the oil well comes out as a dud then the recent price action is justified, however, since the drilling is still in progress with no defined outcome, my discernment is that the current steep drop in its prices reflected mere ‘profit taking’ or a ‘knee jerk’ fickle reaction to something yet to be determined. Unless, of course, the insiders who are in the know have started unloading due to advance knowledge of the status of the drilling project.
Overseas investors were net buyers today, accumulating P 47.560 million worth of equity assets. Aside from the key telecom issues, it seems that investors abroad took heavy positions in Jollibee (+2.04%), which for today, posted the largest amount of net capital inflows. Jollibee has been on a winning streak, since coincidentally, Mr. Tony Tancaktiong, Jollibee’s head huncho took home the prized 2004 World Entrepreneur of the year award in May 29, 2004, held at Monte Carlo Monaco. Jollibee share prices are up 21.95% since May 28 and have attracted P 85.362 million of foreign money or 39.92% of the company’s accrued turnover during the said period. So aside from being blessed with a prestigious global award, Mr. Tancaktiong is likewise being rewarded by a vote of confidence from overseas and local investors. A case of hitting two birds with one stone.
Oil issues took a drubbing today on probable ‘profit taking’. After a sizable climb over the past weeks due to oil drilling speculations, the oil index plummeted 11.63% weighed down by index heavyweights Oriental Petroleum, which fell 16.66% for the foreign shares and 12.72% for the domestic shares. Perhaps what the prompted the fall was Basic Consolidated’s disclosure that it had assigned 1.45425% of its 4.155% share in the Zebra-1 and Rhino-1 wells, which means Basic’s share to the project will be reduced to 2.70%. Basic Consolidated was the second largest day loser plunging by 15.21%. Basic opened the day’s trading gap down, eventually dragging along Oriental Petroleum shares.
Today’s action by investors on Basic Consolidated was quite bizarre. It is as if the recent price of Basic presumed cash flows from an EXISTING commercially producing oil well such that a reduction in its share in the drilling project would mean greatly reduced revenues, hence the logical fall in prices. But what seems to be lost among the local investors is that oil HAS YET to be found, hence the prices of Basic Consolidated has not yet factored in cash flows from the oil well simply because these have yet to be ascertained.
The recent spike in these issues means that investors were positioning for a possible oil discovery. If the oil well comes out as a dud then the recent price action is justified, however, since the drilling is still in progress with no defined outcome, my discernment is that the current steep drop in its prices reflected mere ‘profit taking’ or a ‘knee jerk’ fickle reaction to something yet to be determined. Unless, of course, the insiders who are in the know have started unloading due to advance knowledge of the status of the drilling project.
John Myers: THE CRUDE AWAKENING
THE CRUDE AWAKENING
by John Myers
for the Daily Reckoning
"The days of cheap energy are gone."— Michael Hershey, president, Landis Associates LLC
The only shock about the surging price of oil these days is that Wall Street is shocked by it. If professional investors didn't see this one coming, they must have either been locked up in an Iraqi prison or in a coma. We certainly saw it coming.
For as much as we have talked about the impact of growing demand for petroleum from China, India and a cavalcade of SUV drivers in North America, the biggest reason for the bull market in oil is a shortage of supplies. From bottlenecks caused by aging refineries and a supertanker shortage to depleted production from non-OPEC producers, the price of crude is being pushed higher because of one simple fact: There isn't enough of it.
One of the biggest bottlenecks — one that can't be overcome quickly or easily — in the industry, is the lack of refining capacity in Canada and the United States. The U.S. Energy Department reports that refining capacity in the United States has grown by just 2.4% since 1977, while demand for gasoline has risen 27% during the same period.
And the cruel fact is that no major new oil refineries have been built in the United States or Canada since the early 1980s, and many of the ones that used to exist have been shut down. That's left the continent's existing refineries stretched to capacity, just as North American gasoline markets are heading into the heavy demand summer driving season. According to one estimate, U.S. refineries are running at about 97% capacity.
In fact, many of the refineries that disappeared in the past 20 years were closed because it would have been too expensive to upgrade them to meet new environmental rules. It's not a coincidence that no new refineries have been built since the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency brought in its Clean Air regulations, which placed limits on refinery emissions. How expensive is expensive? Just meeting the various local, state and federal environmental and planning requirements for a new refinery could cost as much as $100 million, according to some estimates — if a site could even be found. And if the permits were acquired, the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works estimates the cost to build a new refinery at a whopping $2.5 billion. And, oh yes, it could take seven years to complete.
If you want to understand the world's oil supply problem, simply look at what happens to a single oil field. Whether you are talking about Prudhoe Bay in Alaska or Leduc in Alberta, the life cycle of an oil field is the same. It takes several years after an oil basin is discovered to achieve maximum production as the field continues to be developed with additional step-out wells.
As a good rule of thumb, after half the recoverable reserves have been pumped from a field, there is a rapid decline in the field's oil reservoir. It becomes less and less economical to pump oil from the field, until a break-even point is reached — a point where the expense of operating the oil field equals the revenues produced by the field.
The physics that apply to a single field also apply to a region or an entire country. Consider the continental United States. The rate at which new oil was discovered hit its peak in 1957. By the early 1960s, the nation's total proven reserves reached their all-time high. Less than a decade later, U.S. production peaked. Production was relatively stable until the mid-1980s and then began to fall precipitously.
Year after year the Americans have made up the shortfall in oil production by importing foreign crude. But what happens when the world's output begins to fall? The price impact of dwindling supplies will meet surging demand — a formula for incredible profits in oil and gas stocks.
What is so bullish for oil is that, while world discovery rates peaked in the 1960s, global oil reserves have not increased since 1990. In fact, over the past four decades, exploration efforts have yielded a diminishing return.
In the 1960s the industry discovered 375 billion barrels... in the '80s, 150 billion barrels were discovered. Even fewer barrels were discovered during the 1990s.
Perhaps this year, and certainly by no later than 2005, world production will hit its apex. That means that over the second half of this decade world oil output will begin to decline... just as global oil demand is surging.
And each year, the world pumps and burns 26 billion barrels of oil, this nonrenewable resource. That means that every four years, more than 100 billion barrels of oil — five times the total reserves of the United States — are consumed.
Of course, not all oil-producing nations will experience a reduction in output at the same time. As I mentioned, U.S. production began to fall in the 1970s. Mexico and North Sea productions are now in decline, and few expect a major discovery in those regions.
The only other major non-OPEC oil region is Russia. But new oil discoveries in the former Soviet Union have been in decline since the late 1980s. The expectation of most oil executives is that we are on the verge of declining Russian oil production.
Oil production from non-OPEC countries has kept oil prices in check until just recently. But nowadays, oil supplies outside OPEC don't gush to the surface the way they once did. The really plum oil fields are in the Persian Gulf.
In 1973 — the eve of the first oil crisis — there were 15 giant oil fields in the world producing over 1 million barrels per day. They accounted for almost 30% of the world's daily supply. Moreover, their average age was only 23 years.
Today 13 of these 15 giant fields are still producing, though their average age is now 50 years. Only two of these original fields still produce over 1 million barrels of oil per day, and the 11 remaining fields each have an average production of around 200,000 to 300,000 barrels per day.
Today, only two fields in all non-OPEC countries produce over 1 million barrels per day. Another three produce about 500,000 barrels per day.
As production in these regions enters into decline, more power falls to OPEC, particularly Arab OPEC. Already countries around the Persian Gulf produce one-third of the world's crude oil and control two-thirds of the world's reserves... and make up the only major oil-producing region in the world that is not yet close to its oil reserve half-life.
Turning to our ally in the Middle East — Saudi Arabia — brings up a new question: Just how effective can Saudi Arabia be in easing the supply crunch?
Put aside for a moment the frightening terrorist activities in that country — like the recent killing of 22 people in Khobar. When you look at the issue of supply versus demand, you have to recognize that not even Saudi Arabia has the oil capacity to ease the world's supply problems.
Twenty-five years ago, Saudi Arabia stood ready to pump 14 million barrels per day. Currently, the Saudis say that, if necessary, they can raise oil output over time from 8.35 million barrels per day to 12 million barrels per day.
But a Calgary geologist, who has spent extensive time working in Saudi Arabia over a career that has spanned 25 years, told us that while the Saudis could raise production to 12 million barrels per day for a time, they certainly couldn't keep that output going for long. Oil simply doesn't flow the way it did 20 years ago. Not even for the Saudis.
All this just tells us that oil prices aren't ready to stabilize, let alone retreat... even though much of the world doesn't believe prices will stay at these levels. The conventional thinking is that oil prices will fall, but I'm certain they'll go just the opposite way... higher!
Regards,
John Myers
for The Daily Reckoning
by John Myers
for the Daily Reckoning
"The days of cheap energy are gone."— Michael Hershey, president, Landis Associates LLC
The only shock about the surging price of oil these days is that Wall Street is shocked by it. If professional investors didn't see this one coming, they must have either been locked up in an Iraqi prison or in a coma. We certainly saw it coming.
For as much as we have talked about the impact of growing demand for petroleum from China, India and a cavalcade of SUV drivers in North America, the biggest reason for the bull market in oil is a shortage of supplies. From bottlenecks caused by aging refineries and a supertanker shortage to depleted production from non-OPEC producers, the price of crude is being pushed higher because of one simple fact: There isn't enough of it.
One of the biggest bottlenecks — one that can't be overcome quickly or easily — in the industry, is the lack of refining capacity in Canada and the United States. The U.S. Energy Department reports that refining capacity in the United States has grown by just 2.4% since 1977, while demand for gasoline has risen 27% during the same period.
And the cruel fact is that no major new oil refineries have been built in the United States or Canada since the early 1980s, and many of the ones that used to exist have been shut down. That's left the continent's existing refineries stretched to capacity, just as North American gasoline markets are heading into the heavy demand summer driving season. According to one estimate, U.S. refineries are running at about 97% capacity.
In fact, many of the refineries that disappeared in the past 20 years were closed because it would have been too expensive to upgrade them to meet new environmental rules. It's not a coincidence that no new refineries have been built since the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency brought in its Clean Air regulations, which placed limits on refinery emissions. How expensive is expensive? Just meeting the various local, state and federal environmental and planning requirements for a new refinery could cost as much as $100 million, according to some estimates — if a site could even be found. And if the permits were acquired, the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works estimates the cost to build a new refinery at a whopping $2.5 billion. And, oh yes, it could take seven years to complete.
If you want to understand the world's oil supply problem, simply look at what happens to a single oil field. Whether you are talking about Prudhoe Bay in Alaska or Leduc in Alberta, the life cycle of an oil field is the same. It takes several years after an oil basin is discovered to achieve maximum production as the field continues to be developed with additional step-out wells.
As a good rule of thumb, after half the recoverable reserves have been pumped from a field, there is a rapid decline in the field's oil reservoir. It becomes less and less economical to pump oil from the field, until a break-even point is reached — a point where the expense of operating the oil field equals the revenues produced by the field.
The physics that apply to a single field also apply to a region or an entire country. Consider the continental United States. The rate at which new oil was discovered hit its peak in 1957. By the early 1960s, the nation's total proven reserves reached their all-time high. Less than a decade later, U.S. production peaked. Production was relatively stable until the mid-1980s and then began to fall precipitously.
Year after year the Americans have made up the shortfall in oil production by importing foreign crude. But what happens when the world's output begins to fall? The price impact of dwindling supplies will meet surging demand — a formula for incredible profits in oil and gas stocks.
What is so bullish for oil is that, while world discovery rates peaked in the 1960s, global oil reserves have not increased since 1990. In fact, over the past four decades, exploration efforts have yielded a diminishing return.
In the 1960s the industry discovered 375 billion barrels... in the '80s, 150 billion barrels were discovered. Even fewer barrels were discovered during the 1990s.
Perhaps this year, and certainly by no later than 2005, world production will hit its apex. That means that over the second half of this decade world oil output will begin to decline... just as global oil demand is surging.
And each year, the world pumps and burns 26 billion barrels of oil, this nonrenewable resource. That means that every four years, more than 100 billion barrels of oil — five times the total reserves of the United States — are consumed.
Of course, not all oil-producing nations will experience a reduction in output at the same time. As I mentioned, U.S. production began to fall in the 1970s. Mexico and North Sea productions are now in decline, and few expect a major discovery in those regions.
The only other major non-OPEC oil region is Russia. But new oil discoveries in the former Soviet Union have been in decline since the late 1980s. The expectation of most oil executives is that we are on the verge of declining Russian oil production.
Oil production from non-OPEC countries has kept oil prices in check until just recently. But nowadays, oil supplies outside OPEC don't gush to the surface the way they once did. The really plum oil fields are in the Persian Gulf.
In 1973 — the eve of the first oil crisis — there were 15 giant oil fields in the world producing over 1 million barrels per day. They accounted for almost 30% of the world's daily supply. Moreover, their average age was only 23 years.
Today 13 of these 15 giant fields are still producing, though their average age is now 50 years. Only two of these original fields still produce over 1 million barrels of oil per day, and the 11 remaining fields each have an average production of around 200,000 to 300,000 barrels per day.
Today, only two fields in all non-OPEC countries produce over 1 million barrels per day. Another three produce about 500,000 barrels per day.
As production in these regions enters into decline, more power falls to OPEC, particularly Arab OPEC. Already countries around the Persian Gulf produce one-third of the world's crude oil and control two-thirds of the world's reserves... and make up the only major oil-producing region in the world that is not yet close to its oil reserve half-life.
Turning to our ally in the Middle East — Saudi Arabia — brings up a new question: Just how effective can Saudi Arabia be in easing the supply crunch?
Put aside for a moment the frightening terrorist activities in that country — like the recent killing of 22 people in Khobar. When you look at the issue of supply versus demand, you have to recognize that not even Saudi Arabia has the oil capacity to ease the world's supply problems.
Twenty-five years ago, Saudi Arabia stood ready to pump 14 million barrels per day. Currently, the Saudis say that, if necessary, they can raise oil output over time from 8.35 million barrels per day to 12 million barrels per day.
But a Calgary geologist, who has spent extensive time working in Saudi Arabia over a career that has spanned 25 years, told us that while the Saudis could raise production to 12 million barrels per day for a time, they certainly couldn't keep that output going for long. Oil simply doesn't flow the way it did 20 years ago. Not even for the Saudis.
All this just tells us that oil prices aren't ready to stabilize, let alone retreat... even though much of the world doesn't believe prices will stay at these levels. The conventional thinking is that oil prices will fall, but I'm certain they'll go just the opposite way... higher!
Regards,
John Myers
for The Daily Reckoning
Thursday, June 24, 2004
June 24, 2004 Philippine Stock Market Review
After a vivacious start, the Phisix succumbed to a late day selling which could be characterized as profit taking on a “sell on news”.
Recall that since the onset of the election campaign period in February the Phisix have climbed by as much as 8.04% in April 28th which probably means that the market has factored in a peaceful conclusion to the national elections with a victory by the incumbent administration.
Today’s early morning proclamation for PGMA and VP De Castro basically put to fact to these anticipations hence, the mixed performance among heavyweights leading to the marginal rise (.02%) of the benchmark Phisix.
Of the eight index heavyweights that comprise more than 75% of the Phisix, three issues advanced, four issues declined while 2 remained unchanged. Key telecom issues PLDT (+.89%) and Globe Telecoms (+.58%) together with Ayala Land (+1.81%) cushioned the declines of Ayala Corp. (-1.75%), San Miguel B (-.68%), SM Primeholdings (-1.66%) and Metrobank (-1.78%). Meanwhile, San Miguel local shares and Bank of the Philippine Islands closed unchanged.
Incidentally, PLDT has surpassed or overtaken San Miguel Corporation as the largest listed company based on market capitalization on the Phisix. As of today’s close PLDT constitutes 17.48% of the 30-company benchmark, with the combined San Miguel shares accounting for 16.52% and the third spot going to the telecom issue, Globe Telecoms which took up 11.04%.
Despite the rather mixed performance of the index as reflected by the major index heavyweights, overall market breadth showed underlying bullishness with advancing issues dominating declining issues by almost 2 to 1, i.e. 42 to 24.
Moreover, the number of traded issues have reached past 100 (exactly 119 today) for the fifth consecutive trading day which means investors optimism have prompted for a broader degree of accumulations.
Furthermore, foreign money, which made up half of today’s turnover, remained on a bullish note injecting some P 47.680 million worth of equity asset acquisitions.
If these underlying bullishness should prevail in addition to the accelerating upside momentum, crossing the April 28th threshold of the 1,610 to 1,620 level could be sooner than expected.
Benson Te
Recall that since the onset of the election campaign period in February the Phisix have climbed by as much as 8.04% in April 28th which probably means that the market has factored in a peaceful conclusion to the national elections with a victory by the incumbent administration.
Today’s early morning proclamation for PGMA and VP De Castro basically put to fact to these anticipations hence, the mixed performance among heavyweights leading to the marginal rise (.02%) of the benchmark Phisix.
Of the eight index heavyweights that comprise more than 75% of the Phisix, three issues advanced, four issues declined while 2 remained unchanged. Key telecom issues PLDT (+.89%) and Globe Telecoms (+.58%) together with Ayala Land (+1.81%) cushioned the declines of Ayala Corp. (-1.75%), San Miguel B (-.68%), SM Primeholdings (-1.66%) and Metrobank (-1.78%). Meanwhile, San Miguel local shares and Bank of the Philippine Islands closed unchanged.
Incidentally, PLDT has surpassed or overtaken San Miguel Corporation as the largest listed company based on market capitalization on the Phisix. As of today’s close PLDT constitutes 17.48% of the 30-company benchmark, with the combined San Miguel shares accounting for 16.52% and the third spot going to the telecom issue, Globe Telecoms which took up 11.04%.
Despite the rather mixed performance of the index as reflected by the major index heavyweights, overall market breadth showed underlying bullishness with advancing issues dominating declining issues by almost 2 to 1, i.e. 42 to 24.
Moreover, the number of traded issues have reached past 100 (exactly 119 today) for the fifth consecutive trading day which means investors optimism have prompted for a broader degree of accumulations.
Furthermore, foreign money, which made up half of today’s turnover, remained on a bullish note injecting some P 47.680 million worth of equity asset acquisitions.
If these underlying bullishness should prevail in addition to the accelerating upside momentum, crossing the April 28th threshold of the 1,610 to 1,620 level could be sooner than expected.
Benson Te
Prof. Sennholz: Democracy Does Not Beget Prosperity
Democracy Does Not Beget Prosperity
A recent report by the World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalization, sponsored by the International Labour Organization, is long on pious advice and short on economic reasoning. It lists l6 developing countries, with 45 percent of the world's population, where the gross domestic product is rising by more than 3 percent a year. Among them are the world's giants, China and India. But in 23 countries, with 5 percent of the world's population, GDP per head is falling. In another 14 countries, with just 8 percent of the world's population, incomes per head are rising by less than 1 percent a year. In short, the age of globalization which has brought significant economic advances to many countries is not reaching 37 countries with some 750 million inhabitants. Lingering in dearth and want, many millions continue to struggle for food and shelter.
The report admonishes poor countries to pursue social and economic policies that characterize all Western democracies. It urges prompt adoption of a democratic form of government, of national independence and sovereignty, and high labor standards enacted and enforced by government. Unfortunately, the advice is apt to be as unrealistic as is its explanation of high standards of living in more productive countries.
Democratic institutions surely provide a broad basis for popular government and give people the noble notion and pride that the country belongs to them. Whenever they grow weary of their government, they can exercise their right to change it. Yet democratization is not a necessary condition for economic development. The most startling economic progress, over the past two decades, has been in China which labors under an authoritarian regime. And many new democracies, from Azerbaijan to Kazakhstan, show little ability to progress economically. Even established democracies stagnate economically, with millions of workers condemned to unemployment and declining standards of living when guided by economic ideologies hostile to economic productivity. Government by the people may be as injurious to economic well-being as any other form of government.
Similarly, national independence and self-government are no guarantee of economic progress. The world's poorest countries, such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Burundi, and Ethiopia, are as independent as the wealthiest countries, but are poorly governed. In fact, the world's poorest countries may even be poorer today than they were in ages past when they labored under foreign rule. In contrast, many countries that until the twentieth century lacked complete independence and self-government, such as Australia (1901) and New Zealand (1947), expanded rapidly as colonies of the British Empire. They enjoyed the ideological and legal preconditions of economic development, that is, safety of private property, entrepreneurial freedom, and the spirit of enterprise. The poverty of many countries, which moves wealthy countries to pity and foreign aid without end, obviously lacks these preconditions; the suffering of the people is likely to continue as long as the sovereignty of their disfunctioning governments remain unchallenged.
It cannot be surprising that the Commission report also acclaims stringent labor legislation while it condemns the omnipresence of informal, illegal labor markets. It obviously ignores the harmful consequences of labor legislation that creates huge surpluses of unskilled labor and thereby gives rise to informal labor markets, commonly called "black markets." Legal labor markets tend to be characterized by standards and benefit costs that exceed actual employee productivity and, therefore, condemn millions of workers to chronic unemployment. While some victims readily content themselves with lives on unemployment benefits and other forms of public charity, many prefer to descend to the underground economy where services are rendered at true market rates and contracts are concluded by word of mouth and a handshake.
Stringent labor legislation, such as that in old welfare states, invariably gives rise to dualistic national economies with a highly-paid legal sector and a huge illegal market sector. The former, stunted by legislation and regulation, generates the surplus of labor for the large underground economy which tends to grow with every new law and regulation that grant costly benefits to labor. In the old welfare states of Europe, where the official rate of unemployment rarely falls below ten percent of the official work force, the informal underground sector may exceed one-third to one-half of total economic production. Without the underground economy, many people would be immeasurably poorer.
The chronic conflict between the legal economy and the unregulated market – which is immune to regulation – begets corruption and decadence. Where the authorities are determined to enforce the myriad of labor regulations they turn their countries into "police states" that prosecute feverishly and meet out fines and imprisonment for petty infractions. To offer unregulated employment to unemployed workers is a grievous employer offense that is punished with heavy fines. They are rather effectual in maintaining high unemployment rates.
The Commission's report clearly reflects its sponsorship by the International Labour Organization. It spurns market economics and sows class conflict. Democracy, sovereignty, and labor regulation give no assurance of economic development; only private property in the means of production and the unhampered market order will encourage economic development and ever-rising standards of living.
Hans F. Sennholz
A recent report by the World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalization, sponsored by the International Labour Organization, is long on pious advice and short on economic reasoning. It lists l6 developing countries, with 45 percent of the world's population, where the gross domestic product is rising by more than 3 percent a year. Among them are the world's giants, China and India. But in 23 countries, with 5 percent of the world's population, GDP per head is falling. In another 14 countries, with just 8 percent of the world's population, incomes per head are rising by less than 1 percent a year. In short, the age of globalization which has brought significant economic advances to many countries is not reaching 37 countries with some 750 million inhabitants. Lingering in dearth and want, many millions continue to struggle for food and shelter.
The report admonishes poor countries to pursue social and economic policies that characterize all Western democracies. It urges prompt adoption of a democratic form of government, of national independence and sovereignty, and high labor standards enacted and enforced by government. Unfortunately, the advice is apt to be as unrealistic as is its explanation of high standards of living in more productive countries.
Democratic institutions surely provide a broad basis for popular government and give people the noble notion and pride that the country belongs to them. Whenever they grow weary of their government, they can exercise their right to change it. Yet democratization is not a necessary condition for economic development. The most startling economic progress, over the past two decades, has been in China which labors under an authoritarian regime. And many new democracies, from Azerbaijan to Kazakhstan, show little ability to progress economically. Even established democracies stagnate economically, with millions of workers condemned to unemployment and declining standards of living when guided by economic ideologies hostile to economic productivity. Government by the people may be as injurious to economic well-being as any other form of government.
Similarly, national independence and self-government are no guarantee of economic progress. The world's poorest countries, such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Burundi, and Ethiopia, are as independent as the wealthiest countries, but are poorly governed. In fact, the world's poorest countries may even be poorer today than they were in ages past when they labored under foreign rule. In contrast, many countries that until the twentieth century lacked complete independence and self-government, such as Australia (1901) and New Zealand (1947), expanded rapidly as colonies of the British Empire. They enjoyed the ideological and legal preconditions of economic development, that is, safety of private property, entrepreneurial freedom, and the spirit of enterprise. The poverty of many countries, which moves wealthy countries to pity and foreign aid without end, obviously lacks these preconditions; the suffering of the people is likely to continue as long as the sovereignty of their disfunctioning governments remain unchallenged.
It cannot be surprising that the Commission report also acclaims stringent labor legislation while it condemns the omnipresence of informal, illegal labor markets. It obviously ignores the harmful consequences of labor legislation that creates huge surpluses of unskilled labor and thereby gives rise to informal labor markets, commonly called "black markets." Legal labor markets tend to be characterized by standards and benefit costs that exceed actual employee productivity and, therefore, condemn millions of workers to chronic unemployment. While some victims readily content themselves with lives on unemployment benefits and other forms of public charity, many prefer to descend to the underground economy where services are rendered at true market rates and contracts are concluded by word of mouth and a handshake.
Stringent labor legislation, such as that in old welfare states, invariably gives rise to dualistic national economies with a highly-paid legal sector and a huge illegal market sector. The former, stunted by legislation and regulation, generates the surplus of labor for the large underground economy which tends to grow with every new law and regulation that grant costly benefits to labor. In the old welfare states of Europe, where the official rate of unemployment rarely falls below ten percent of the official work force, the informal underground sector may exceed one-third to one-half of total economic production. Without the underground economy, many people would be immeasurably poorer.
The chronic conflict between the legal economy and the unregulated market – which is immune to regulation – begets corruption and decadence. Where the authorities are determined to enforce the myriad of labor regulations they turn their countries into "police states" that prosecute feverishly and meet out fines and imprisonment for petty infractions. To offer unregulated employment to unemployed workers is a grievous employer offense that is punished with heavy fines. They are rather effectual in maintaining high unemployment rates.
The Commission's report clearly reflects its sponsorship by the International Labour Organization. It spurns market economics and sows class conflict. Democracy, sovereignty, and labor regulation give no assurance of economic development; only private property in the means of production and the unhampered market order will encourage economic development and ever-rising standards of living.
Hans F. Sennholz
The Economist: America's Trade Deficit
How to slay America's monster trade gap?
Jun 22nd 2004
From The Economist Global Agenda
America’s trade gap is growing again. Worse, it may be extremely hard to close it without causing much economic pain—and not just for Americans
LAST year, when the dollar resumed its steady decline after a brief spring rally, many observers felt vindicated and a little relieved. The world had grown too dependent on selling its goods to America. For its part, America was too dependent on flogging its assets to the rest of the world to finance its addiction to imported goods. To be sure, America’s willingness to spend more than it could strictly afford on other countries’ manufactures was welcome at a time when most of these countries’ economies were sluggish. But deficits of over 5% of GDP in America’s current account could not be sustained. Having carried the world economy through the first, crucial leg of recovery from the slowdown of 2001, some economists felt it was time for America to “hand over the baton” to the rest of the world and pause for breath.
But America is refusing to let go of the baton. It continues to import much more than it exports while investing more than it saves. According to figures released last Friday, its current-account deficit, having narrowed to 4.6% of GDP at the end of last year, has widened again in the first quarter of this year (see chart), to 5.1% of GDP.
Were we expecting too much from a fall in the dollar? In other countries, a swift depreciation of the exchange rate has worked wonders. A fall of 20%-plus, in real terms, in the Swedish krone after 1992, for example, turned a deficit of more than 3% of GDP into a surplus of about 4%. But Sweden is a relatively small economy. Providing it remains outside the euro, it can depreciate, gaining competitiveness against its neighbours, without beggaring them. The United States, on other hand, is such a crucial destination for the imports of so many countries that they may struggle to find alternative sources of demand.
A recent study* by economists at the OECD illustrates the difficulty. To narrow the deficit by two percentage points by the end of the decade, they reckon the greenback would have to lose about a quarter of its current value (as measured against the currencies of America’s major trading partners) by the end of this year. Since China and Malaysia peg their currencies to the dollar, and many other Asian countries track it closely, Japan and the euro area would bear the brunt of the dollar’s fall. They would not bear it easily. America is such an important export market for both that neither would cope easily with such a loss of competitiveness. The European Central Bank (ECB) has some scope to ease the blow by cutting interest rates but the Bank of Japan has already cut them as low as they can go. As a result, the strengthening yen would cut Japan’s output in 2009 by more than 2% and condemn the country to another six years of falling prices, the study reckons.
Earlier this month, at the summit of G8 heads of state in the American state of Georgia, France’s President Jacques Chirac worried out loud about the future implications of America’s spendthrift ways. The Europeans point the finger in particular at President George Bush’s government, which is projected to run a budget deficit of 4.7% of GDP this year. America’s outsized trade deficit, the Europeans argue, is the “twin” of this giant budget deficit. One cannot be dealt with, without the other.
But even as Europeans accuse the United States of throwing the world economy off balance, Americans accuse an arthritic Europe of holding the world economy back. Europe’s firms and workers are too cosseted, they argue, and as a result the continent’s economies are unable to pull their weight in the world economy. America is prepared to hand over the baton; but Europe must be ready to take it up.
Neither side of this debate is much willing to listen to the other. But what if they did? The OECD’s economists shed light on what would happen if each side took the advice of the other. Suppose, for example, that the governments of the euro area (and America’s other OECD trading partners) heeded Uncle Sam’s lectures and passed liberalising reforms that raised their trend rates of growth by 0.5%. This would do wonders for the euro area itself, but it would do little to narrow America’s trade deficit. The OECD economists reckon it would cut the deficit by just 0.2% of GDP by 2009. Despite what many Americans would like to believe, America’s trade gap is not simply an expression of its faster growth rate. The study found that America’s appetite for foreign goods is so much stronger than the rest of the world’s desire for American goods that even if the other rich countries raised their growth rates to match America’s, they would still sell more to America than it would sell to them.
Now suppose America gave in to the hectoring of Mr Chirac and others and put its finances back in order. The OECD’s authors imagine an administration prepared to raise taxes by 4.5% of GDP over the next six years while cutting spending by 1.5%. This would put the government into the black to the tune of 1.7% of GDP by 2009. But even such a massive fiscal turnaround, amounting to 6.6% of GDP, would knock only 2% of GDP off the trade deficit. Why? The OECD economists point out that private saving tends to fall when public saving increases. Between 1992 and 2000, for example, the Clinton administration turned a worrying budget deficit into a handsome surplus. But this only helped to unleash a private investment boom. Public saving was offset by private dissaving, ensuring that the country’s trade deficit continued to deteriorate. America’s budget and trade deficits may be twins but one, it seems, can survive without the other.
America’s deficit will not resolve itself without much pain, suggest the OECD economists. America must beggar its neighbours with a competitive devaluation of the dollar, or beggar itself with a massive fiscal contraction—or both. The consequences of letting America’s deficits continue are certainly worrisome, as Mr Chirac suggests. But he should be equally worried about the consequences of bringing them to an end.
Jun 22nd 2004
From The Economist Global Agenda
America’s trade gap is growing again. Worse, it may be extremely hard to close it without causing much economic pain—and not just for Americans
LAST year, when the dollar resumed its steady decline after a brief spring rally, many observers felt vindicated and a little relieved. The world had grown too dependent on selling its goods to America. For its part, America was too dependent on flogging its assets to the rest of the world to finance its addiction to imported goods. To be sure, America’s willingness to spend more than it could strictly afford on other countries’ manufactures was welcome at a time when most of these countries’ economies were sluggish. But deficits of over 5% of GDP in America’s current account could not be sustained. Having carried the world economy through the first, crucial leg of recovery from the slowdown of 2001, some economists felt it was time for America to “hand over the baton” to the rest of the world and pause for breath.
But America is refusing to let go of the baton. It continues to import much more than it exports while investing more than it saves. According to figures released last Friday, its current-account deficit, having narrowed to 4.6% of GDP at the end of last year, has widened again in the first quarter of this year (see chart), to 5.1% of GDP.
Were we expecting too much from a fall in the dollar? In other countries, a swift depreciation of the exchange rate has worked wonders. A fall of 20%-plus, in real terms, in the Swedish krone after 1992, for example, turned a deficit of more than 3% of GDP into a surplus of about 4%. But Sweden is a relatively small economy. Providing it remains outside the euro, it can depreciate, gaining competitiveness against its neighbours, without beggaring them. The United States, on other hand, is such a crucial destination for the imports of so many countries that they may struggle to find alternative sources of demand.
A recent study* by economists at the OECD illustrates the difficulty. To narrow the deficit by two percentage points by the end of the decade, they reckon the greenback would have to lose about a quarter of its current value (as measured against the currencies of America’s major trading partners) by the end of this year. Since China and Malaysia peg their currencies to the dollar, and many other Asian countries track it closely, Japan and the euro area would bear the brunt of the dollar’s fall. They would not bear it easily. America is such an important export market for both that neither would cope easily with such a loss of competitiveness. The European Central Bank (ECB) has some scope to ease the blow by cutting interest rates but the Bank of Japan has already cut them as low as they can go. As a result, the strengthening yen would cut Japan’s output in 2009 by more than 2% and condemn the country to another six years of falling prices, the study reckons.
Earlier this month, at the summit of G8 heads of state in the American state of Georgia, France’s President Jacques Chirac worried out loud about the future implications of America’s spendthrift ways. The Europeans point the finger in particular at President George Bush’s government, which is projected to run a budget deficit of 4.7% of GDP this year. America’s outsized trade deficit, the Europeans argue, is the “twin” of this giant budget deficit. One cannot be dealt with, without the other.
But even as Europeans accuse the United States of throwing the world economy off balance, Americans accuse an arthritic Europe of holding the world economy back. Europe’s firms and workers are too cosseted, they argue, and as a result the continent’s economies are unable to pull their weight in the world economy. America is prepared to hand over the baton; but Europe must be ready to take it up.
Neither side of this debate is much willing to listen to the other. But what if they did? The OECD’s economists shed light on what would happen if each side took the advice of the other. Suppose, for example, that the governments of the euro area (and America’s other OECD trading partners) heeded Uncle Sam’s lectures and passed liberalising reforms that raised their trend rates of growth by 0.5%. This would do wonders for the euro area itself, but it would do little to narrow America’s trade deficit. The OECD economists reckon it would cut the deficit by just 0.2% of GDP by 2009. Despite what many Americans would like to believe, America’s trade gap is not simply an expression of its faster growth rate. The study found that America’s appetite for foreign goods is so much stronger than the rest of the world’s desire for American goods that even if the other rich countries raised their growth rates to match America’s, they would still sell more to America than it would sell to them.
Now suppose America gave in to the hectoring of Mr Chirac and others and put its finances back in order. The OECD’s authors imagine an administration prepared to raise taxes by 4.5% of GDP over the next six years while cutting spending by 1.5%. This would put the government into the black to the tune of 1.7% of GDP by 2009. But even such a massive fiscal turnaround, amounting to 6.6% of GDP, would knock only 2% of GDP off the trade deficit. Why? The OECD economists point out that private saving tends to fall when public saving increases. Between 1992 and 2000, for example, the Clinton administration turned a worrying budget deficit into a handsome surplus. But this only helped to unleash a private investment boom. Public saving was offset by private dissaving, ensuring that the country’s trade deficit continued to deteriorate. America’s budget and trade deficits may be twins but one, it seems, can survive without the other.
America’s deficit will not resolve itself without much pain, suggest the OECD economists. America must beggar its neighbours with a competitive devaluation of the dollar, or beggar itself with a massive fiscal contraction—or both. The consequences of letting America’s deficits continue are certainly worrisome, as Mr Chirac suggests. But he should be equally worried about the consequences of bringing them to an end.
From Forbes Magazine: Dumbest Business Ideas
Dumbest Business Idea Of The Year
Tatiana Serafin, 07.05.04
Recycling entrepreneur Bernie C. Karl thought he had a cool way to lure tourists to remote Chena Hot Springs, 60 miles east of Fairbanks, Alaska. He would erect the world's first and only year-round hotel made of ice. Three other ice hotels, in Finland, Sweden and Canada, offer winter-only ice capades.
Karl's six-room Aurora Ice Hotel opened in December. Before spring was over, it was melting, along with his $20,000 investment. He somehow miscalculated the effect of 24-hour summer sun and 90-degree heat on the structure.
"I had a frozen asset. It's now a liquid asset," confesses Karl. He plans to rebuild, this time with thicker insulation.
Tatiana Serafin, 07.05.04
Recycling entrepreneur Bernie C. Karl thought he had a cool way to lure tourists to remote Chena Hot Springs, 60 miles east of Fairbanks, Alaska. He would erect the world's first and only year-round hotel made of ice. Three other ice hotels, in Finland, Sweden and Canada, offer winter-only ice capades.
Karl's six-room Aurora Ice Hotel opened in December. Before spring was over, it was melting, along with his $20,000 investment. He somehow miscalculated the effect of 24-hour summer sun and 90-degree heat on the structure.
"I had a frozen asset. It's now a liquid asset," confesses Karl. He plans to rebuild, this time with thicker insulation.
Wednesday, June 23, 2004
June 23, 2004 Philippine Stock Market Review
The Philippine benchmark index, the Phisix, recouped its post election losses and surged past the pre-May 10 levels. Foreign and local buying highlighted the session as advancers beat decliners 51 to 7, for its fifth consecutive positive market breadth with volume peso turnover expanding by P 666.410 million, the highest turnover since June 2nd. Net foreign buying accounted for P 42.768 million with the gist of the volume going to market leader PLDT(+2.29%), followed by bank heavyweights BPI (+3.61%) and MBT (+3.67%). The largest net foreign selling was accounted for by Meralco B (-1.66%) and SM Primeholdings (unchanged).
Only the mining index closed marginally lower among the other indices, taking a reprieve from its recent blistering run.
The Phisix, since its trough in May 19, has crept higher, probably due to positive expectations of peaceful conclusion to the recent national elections. Since May 19 the Phisix has grown 7.15% or 105 points. Chartwise, today’s gain of 30.65 points or 1.99% advance came at a significant break from its minor resistance level of 1,551 which may indicate that the momentum would mostly likely persist in the following days.
Only the mining index closed marginally lower among the other indices, taking a reprieve from its recent blistering run.
The Phisix, since its trough in May 19, has crept higher, probably due to positive expectations of peaceful conclusion to the recent national elections. Since May 19 the Phisix has grown 7.15% or 105 points. Chartwise, today’s gain of 30.65 points or 1.99% advance came at a significant break from its minor resistance level of 1,551 which may indicate that the momentum would mostly likely persist in the following days.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)