The silence of the co-driver etc

While the internet is buzzing with comments on Tony Tan & Son, the WP is being like the mainstream, constructive, nation-building media: silent as if there are no issues about the NS of a presedential candidate. Actually a bit unfair on MSM. They did carry Tony Tan’s version of what happened.

When the WP asked us for our votes so that they could co-drive with the PAP and give the PAP a “tight slap” if the PAP did something wrong, we delivered Aljunied, and almost East Coast and Joo Chiat. Looks as if WP is not happy with us.

Pritam Singh is regularly, publicly mentally masturbating about the WP forming a coalition with the PAP. So that the WP is allowed to put a finger on the steering wheel? But we only get silence on what the WP thinks abt the NS deferment for 13 yrs for the Patrician’s son, and related issues.

The two “People’s Voicess” are also silent.

As we know, TKL has a public position on almost every topical topic. But his megaphone is muted when it comes to the issues surrounding Patrick and Tony Tan. He expects us to believe he will be our public voice on other “sensitive” matters?

And that self-proclaimed silent “Voice of the People” remains silent. If we elect Tan Cheng Bock as president, we will have silence from him for six years. He tells us to trust him that he will speak out privately. But why should we trust him? On his track record of speaking his mind publicly, he says.  But thaz the problem. He is asking us to make a leap of faith. Where once there was evidence, now there will be no evidence.

And what abt the SDP, NSP and SPP? Kinda silent on this “hot” topic?  The silence of the RP and SDA are understandable. They are the walking dead.

And what abt LKY? The man who tells us that people like him get “an extra egg”, discounts because of who they are. What does he think? Is Tony Tan one of these people entitled to discounts? And is it OK for Mindef to give “an extra egg”?

HSBC: Cutting the fat

HSBC has said it will cut 30,000 jobs by 2013 and exit operations in 20 countries as it looks to save billions of dollars.

The announcement came as the bank reported pre-tax profits for the first six months of the year of $11.5bn (£7bn), up 3% on the $11.1bn the bank made a year earlier. A very decent set of results.

As a shareholder, I can only say “about time”.

Gd analysis  http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/08/01/hsbc-to-cut-25000-more-jobs/?nl=business&emc=dlbka8

Nomura’s S’pore calls

Last week, Nomura issued a report on S’pore. Not surprisingly, defensive stocks found favour.

It cited an uncertain external environment, a slowing economic outlook for Singapore and an over-extended residential property sector. It expected the Straits Times Index to trade range between 2,900 and 3,200 for the rest of the year.

It  advised investors to go for sectors that provide sustainable dividend yields and stocks that have a regional presence and a re-rating potential based on fundamentals.

Nomura said that following the Singapore general election, the property, gaming and land transport sectors could see policy reviews which could undermine the performance of related stocks.

An over-extended residential property market could also start to impact banks’ earnings.

Calling for an overweight on telcos and conglomerates, Nomura said that it is bullish on these sectors for their yields.

“SingTel (5 per cent yield) and M-1 (6 per cent) provide the stability of yields and resilient earnings . . . OCBC is our top pick for banks given its broad wealth management platform and regional presence”.

Among conglomerates, it picks ST Engineering, Keppel Corp and F&N for their strong business franchises (potential for re-rating) and yields.

It also favours Reits, saying, “With the persistent low interest rate environment, Reits are attractive for their 5 per cent-plus yields”. Favourites are Suntec, K-Reit and CapitaCommercial Trust.

In commodities, it said Olam and Golden Agri are trading at attractive levels.

Finally, Biosensors is seen as being able to re-rate on strong growth for its drug eluting stent products in China and Japan.

“little disappointment”: Tony Tan to TOC

Here’s another example of Tony Tan and his team’s carelessness (or is it elitist meritocratic snobbery at work?).when talking to “lesser mortals”, in this case the plebs at TOC. I don’t think, based on TOC’s reply, that the plebs understood why patricians read TOC’s piece “with a little disappointment”.

Let me explain. Tony Tan and his team are disappointed because they must believe in an 18th century philosophical theory that is now treated as a forerunner of the concept of “subjective idealism”. One Bishop Berkeley argued that there are no material objects, only minds and ideas in those minds. He summarised his theory with the motto “esse est percipi” (“To be is to be perceived”). In modern PR-speak, this translates into,“Perception is reality”, one of the major tenets of the PR and public communication industry.

This theory of “Perception is reality” is best summarised in the following example he gave. If a tree in a forest falls, but no-one sees or hears it fall, has it fallen? Berkeley argues that it has not fallen. It is still standing.

An example in the S’pore context would be that S’poreans were not aware of how close the voting would be on polling day in 1988 in Eunos GRC and in Cheng San GRC in 1991. The mainstream media did not report the sentiment on the ground in these two GRCs, so S’poreans were not aware that many S’poreans were unhappy with the PAP. The unhappiness did not exist because it was not reported.

Coming back to Tony Tan. We know that our constructive, nation building media did not see it fit to cover the questions raised by netizens after Tony Tan issued a statement on FaceBook explaining his son’s very, very long disruption from NS. One could reasonably argue (based on the reporting of voters’ views in Eunos and Cheng San) that the media didn’t report the statement and the queries it raised because the media were adopting Berkeley’s reasoning that if no-one knew a tree fell, it hadn’t fallen.

Here because mainstream S’poreans were not aware of the questions raised by some netizens, these questions were never asked (i.e. did not exist). But because TOC informed mainstream S’poreans that the questions existed, they (the questions) came into existence. And this disappointed Tony Tan and team “a little”.

Get it? If you don’t, don’t worry. I am just trying to show that Tony Tan and his team communes not with us “lesser mortals”, but with the immortals. Well let the immortals vote for him.

As for myself,in a three-Tan race, I was planning to vote (admittedly through gritted teeth) for Tony Tan because I didn’t want a “feedback”, “constructive criticism only”, and fickle-minded president i.e. TKL by default. But after this and other public communication failures by Tony Tan, I’ll vote for the guy I want as President, Tan Cheng Bock.

If TKL becomes president, the government can come to a deal with him (remember the 2008 Income AGM?) or remove him.