Malaysia Continues to Improve in Ease of Doing Business

WORLD BANK
October 23, 2012
PRESS RELEASE


Kuala Lumpur, October 23, 2012—A new report from IFC and the World Bank finds that Malaysia remains among the world’s most business-friendly countries.

Released today, Doing Business 2013: Smarter Regulations for Small and Medium-Size Enterprises  notes that Malaysia made dealing with construction permits faster by improving the one-stop center for new buildings and by reducing the time to connect to telephone services.

“Malaysia is to be commended for its ongoing efforts to reduce the costs of doing business,” said Annette Dixon, World Bank Country Director for Malaysia. “This will help the private sector drive growth, especially if Malaysia can build on its success by continuing to tackle long-term challenges, such as improving the quality of education.”

Malaysia also cut the number of days it takes to register property transfers by introducing a new caseload management system at the land registry. Inspired by effective supply chain management strategies employed by the private sector, the registry reduced registration time from 41 days in 2011 to 7 days in 2012 for non strata properties (those that are not part of a subdivision or common-interest community).

“Malaysia continues to improve the quality of domestic regulations. This has great potential to energize the private sector when combined with stepped-up implementation of strategic reform initiatives, especially the liberalization of services sectors and the enforcement of the new competition law,” said Frederico Gil Sander, World Bank Senior Economist for Malaysia.

The Doing Business 2013 report, which covers the period from June 2011 to June 2012 and which uses data for indicators that measure regulation affecting 10 key areas of the life cycle of local businesses, finds that Singapore tops the global ranking on the ease of doing business for the seventh consecutive year, while Hong Kong SAR, China, holds onto the second spot.

The report finds that 23 economies in East Asia and the Pacific have made their regulatory environment more business-friendly since 2005. During that time, China made the greatest progress in improving business regulations for local entrepreneurs. The report also notes that 11 of 24 economies in East Asia and the Pacific improved business regulations in the past year.

Joining Singapore and Hong Kong SAR, China, on the list of the 10 economies with the most business-friendly regulations are, in this order, New Zealand; the United States; Denmark; Norway; the United Kingdom; the Republic of Korea; Georgia; and Australia.

About the Doing Business report series

Doing Business analyzes regulations that apply to an economy’s businesses during their life cycle, including start-up and operations, trading across borders, paying taxes, and protecting investors. The aggregate ease of doing business rankings are based on 10 indicators and cover 185 economies. Doing Business does not measure all aspects of the business environment that matter to firms and investors. For example, it does not measure the quality of fiscal management, other aspects of macroeconomic stability, the level of skills in the labor force, or the resilience of financial systems. Its findings have stimulated policy debates worldwide and enabled a growing body of research on how firm-level regulation relates to economic outcomes across economies. This year’s report marks the 10th edition of the global Doing Business report series.


DOWNLOAD THE 140 PAGES FULL REPORT HERE!!

JAPAN WILL SURVIVE! - ARTICLE AND RESEARCH BY NIK ZAFRI


What is happening in Japan is very tragic. Our hearts go out to all those suffering.

It is with heavy heart when I wrote this article as too many questions been e-mailed to me about the post-economic effects of the Tsunami and quakes in Northern Japan.

Definitely oil prices slumped below $98/barrel. This would be worse depending on the situation at the nuclear plant.

Some large nations including China is cutting back nuclear-investment. It means that there is and will be higher demand for oil.

Already global stock markets sharp falls have been observed.

I stand with other global analysts that the immediate dampening effect of the earthquake on Japanese oil demand soon would be reversed. Let not anyone forget about the current crisis the Middle East and North Africa, recovery process in Egypt and the latest "Libya and Gaddafi's Factor" is also affecting the global oil price.

On Japan itself, yes they will be affected somehow - judging by the past experience of Kobe, it has caused > USD100 billion of damages with more than 5000 people are killed.

The death toll now; as I speak; unfortunately; is more than Kobe. Not to mention the grid and network of electrical and communication which may affect macroecomically speaking across the nation.

Furthermore, global ripple effects especially on the United States would be on the auto industry, semiconductors etc.

How would investors in Japan react?

Not good, there are talks about them dumping some of that debt (government bond) in Japan despite assurance there will be budget - spend massive amounts of money rebuilding infrastructure and factories in Northern Japan.

Also there have been rumours about pulling yen out of the abroad market for rehabilitation purposes in the affected places in Japan. But the affect is short term and yen may strengthen but not in the interest of the Feds. With the sharp increase of commodity and oil prices, interest rates might be pushed up.

For the opportunists or 'profitists?' (if there is such word)?

Well as usual - sort term sell-offs = long term gain if you are up to it.

1. Auto industry - Japan's sales is more focussed outside and performing splendidly - take Toyota for example - they will go through this as they still have cash - lots of them

2. Nuclear & Uranium - Operators are worried about regulatory and political even monetary policies.

This is a normal case - If you all recall the BP/oil spill case which lead to more offshore drilling - then please do not worry.

I quote this from Motley fool website :

Southern Co. (NYSE: SO) and Exelon (NYSE: EXC) stand out as two intriguing names that have traded off a bit on the market's tumults. Exelon, in particular, has been hit hard and offers big upside. Exelon might be the largest nuclear power producer in the U.S., but about 1/3 of its power generating capacity comes from sources other than nuclear. For that matter, the company operates regulated utilities which offer very consistent cash flow and, frankly, have no real exposure to the drama you're seeing on television. Put it all together with a 5% dividend yield and a valuation that already assumes paltry growth, and you're looking at a bargain.


The Motley Fool are so cool that they also 'agree' to my answer :

Shrinking in uranium demand? No way. China and Russia will continue to create a long term demand growth!!

We have seen how Japan move up after Hiroshima and Nagasaki, after Kobe incident - so what would stop them from going up after this one? Because of there will be heavy spending - in the medium term - they will be UP!

I'm not a Japanese but I do know how the system works over there...so don't create more panic, do not listen to rumours.
----------------------------

Menjawab soalan dari seorang rakan di luar negara mengenai impak pos-bencana di Jepun ke atas negara-negara ASEAN


Nik Zafri :

Terima kasih saudara kerana soalan berkenaan.

Secara ringkasnya :

KDNK Jepun akan menjadi perlahan tetapi hanyalah bersifat sementara tetapi saya pasti ianya akan 'pick-up' pertengahan 2011 kerana program pembinaan semula.

Walaupun terdapat laporan ketidaktentuan kerana reaktor nuklear, berpandukan pengalaman Hiroshima dan Nagasaki, mereka pasti akan berjaya dalam usaha membangunkan semula negara matahari terbit ini.

Terdapat suara-suara kebimbangan di kalangan negara ASEAN namun impak sebenarnya adalah sangat terhad kecuali sektor pengeluaran automotif dan elektronik.

Potensi KDNK ASEAN sangat tinggi kerana keupayaannya untuk melepasi tahap bahaya selepas krisis global yang bermula dari US (Sab-Prima) dahulu. Jadi saya berpendapat ASEAN akan dapat memproses impak bencana Jepun dengan baik serta merancang satu usaha untuk melepasi tahap ini pula. Kita sebenarnya bertuah kerana mempunyai ramai pemikir-pemikir strategik di negara-negara ASEAN.

Yang paling penting, kita mengawal perasaan supaya kita tidak panik. Kerana, andaikan kita gagal mengawal impak dengan baik, kita akan berhadapan dengan masalah baru iaitu inflasi kerana terdapat tanda-tanda kenaikan dalam kemasukan portfolio modal, kenaikan harga komoditi serta makanan. Negara-negara yang berpendapatan rendah akan pasti merasai kesan ini.

Seperti biasa, tugas mencari jalan bagi merendahkan kadar inflasi sekiranya ia berlaku bergantung kepada negara-negara ASEAN lain untuk merangka satu cara atau polisi yang strategik.Kenaikan komoditi secara berterusan mungkin akan menyebabkan situasi ketidaktentuan di masa hadapan.


Saya mendapat beberapa info dari rakan penganalisa barat yang rata-rata memberitahu saya bahawa ASEAN mempunyai potensi yang tinggi TERUTAMANYA Malaysia dan Singapura disebabkan situasi ketidaktentuan di Timur Tengah, Eropah, Korea dan kini di Jepun.

Oleh sebab kedudukan ini, Malaysia perlu memainkan peranan besar dalam ASEAN termasuk China.

Walaupun China akan menjadi kuasa ekonomi yang besar terutamanya pengekspot dan pengeluar, namun ianya akan bergantung kepada sokongan rakan-rakan ASEANnya. Di sini Malaysia boleh berkongsi pengalaman menerusi proses industrialisasi dan urbanisasi yang selama ini terbukti menjadikan Malaysia negara maju pada tahun 2020.

Lagi pun, Malaysia merupakan satu-satunya negara yang masih aman, maju dan makmur serta tidak mengalami apa-apa bencana alam yang besar seperti negara-negara lain di dunia. Alhamdulillah.

Wassalam - perlu diingatkan ini adalah pendapat peribadi berdasarkan kajian saya dan bukanlah mewakili mana-mana pihak.

WHAT'S DRIVING GOLD?

(A)

Cause :

Growth in World Money Supply

Years of easy monetary policies by central banks and now the trillions of dollars in economic stimulus to fight the global recession

Effect :

Inflationary Pressures

Excess cash in marketplace eventually tends to bid up prices for goods and services

Possible Ramifications

Declining Confidence in Paper Money

The prospect of inflation lowers confidence in Paper money a a store of value leading may investors to buy gold to preserve their wealth

(B)

Cause :

Volatile Stocks and Oil Prices

After several bull market years, stock and commodity markets turned down dramatically in 200 as the global economy slid into recession. While markets have partially recovered from their low, they remain volatile and many investors remain focused on capital preservation

Effect

Safe Haven Appeal

With other hard assets like real estate and commodities losing value, there was a revived appreciation of gold as a safe haven for investors seeking to protect themselves during difficult times.

Possible Ramifications

Increased Demand for Gold

The recession of 2008 created a large new class of gold investors. The strong demand exerted by this group, along with traditional gold buyers, drained the global inventory of gold coins and gold bars, thus driving up the price of bullion at a time of shrinking worldwide production.

(C)

Cause :

China

Gold has long been prized in China, which is one of the world's largest producers and consumers. Increasingly China's gold market has become more liberalized

Effect :



Trade Surplus

China has a huge trade surplus with the U.S. and Europe that generates vast quantitites of foreign currency. China also has one of the world's highest savings rates.

Possible Ramifications

China buys a considerable amount of U.S. Government debt, but it is diversifying its reserves by increasing its holdings of gold. In addition, China is pursuing investments to recycle its dollars into natural resource projects.

(D)

Cause :

Low Gold Price in 90s

After climbing as high as $850 an ounce in 1980, gold dropped as low as $252 an ounce in 1999.

Effect :

Cuts in Exploration

Low prices and environmental controls discouraged mining companies from spending the money to find new supplies of gold

Possible Ramifications

Falling Production

The lack of investment during the low-price years means new supplies of gold have not kept pace with gold demand

(E)

Cause :

Low Interest Rate

When real interest rates are low many investors turn away from paper assets with declining value and instead turn towar assets with real value, like gold.

Effect :

Hedging Curtailed

When interest rates are low, there is little incentive for hedging. As a result, gold is removed from the market.

Possible Ramifications

A decline in hedging shrinks short-term gold supply, creating a market imbalance during a time of escalating demand.

(F)

Cause :


Credit Crisis

The U.S. economy has been hurt by tighter liquidity associated with heavy losses in the key housing and financial sectors

Effect :

Interest Rate Cuts by Fed

The Federal Reserve has cut interest rates effectively to zero in an effort to lift the economy out of recession

Possible Ramifications

Weaker U.S. Dollar

Rate cuts drive down returns for currency investors. Many of those investors will buy gold as an alternative reserve asset, thus driving up demand.

Nik Zafri's current status : (23 September, 2010)

I feel uneasy when some 'powerful quarters' wanted to do business with China but at the same time demanding, questioning and even try to dictate terms regarding China's (Reminbi) exchange rate policy.(Why after 10 years? - only now some 'people' started to complain) They say Reminbi being undervalued (1% appreciation).China is smarter...don't push them - they might consider PEGGING the Reminbi (like what Malaysia did) and the powerful ones will now know that China means BUSINESS.

Not long after I've posted this, here is China's stand :

NO BASIS FOR MAJOR APPRECIATION OF YUAN : CHINA PM - (AFP) – 2 hours ago (9.58AM Malaysia Time - 23/09/2010)

NEW YORK — China's premier has said that there is no basis for a drastic appreciation of the yuan, responding to increasingly angry claims in the United States that Beijing was keeping its currency low.

"There is no basis for a drastic appreciation of the renminbi (yuan)," Prime Minister Wen Jiabao said in a speech before the US-China Business Committee in New York.

"If the renminbi appreciates by 20 to 40 percent according to the requests of the US government, we do not know how many Chinese companies will go bankrupt and how many Chinese workers will be laid off and how many rural workers will go back to their homes and there will be major turbulence in the Chinese society," he said, according to a translation of his speech.

Washington has been toughening its rhetoric over China's currency handling in recent weeks, accusing Beijing of keeping its currency artificially low against the dollar to make its exports more competitive.

Speaking earlier Wednesday, Wen called for "large-scale" trade cooperation with the United States.

The United States and China -- the world's top two economies -- should "positively carry out large-scale economic and trade cooperation," Wen said, while warning that mutual trust was the precondition for such a move.

Wen said a "sound and stable Sino-US economic and trade relationship is in line with the fundamental interests of both countries," in comments carried by China's official Xinhua news agency.

The "structure of Sino-US investment and trade" was to blame for the massive US trade deficit, not the value of the Chinese currency, the Chinese leader said.

Wen spoke at a meeting of "celebrities from the US economic and financial community," Xinhua reported. Former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger and former Treasury secretary Robert Rubin were among those invited.

Members of a key US congressional panel are due to vote Friday on legislation that would call on the US Commerce Department to punish Beijing for allegedly manipulating its currency and distorting trade.

President Barack Obama warned earlier this week that the yuan "is valued lower than market conditions would say it should be," and called on the Chinese to do more to promote "fair" trading conditions.

"What we've said to them is, you need to let your currency rise... you're getting wealthier, you're exporting a lot, there should be an adjustment there based on market conditions," Obama said during a town hall style-meeting on CNBC television.

"They have said 'yes' in theory, but in fact they have not done everything that needs to be done," said Obama, who will meet Wen in New York on Thursday.

US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner also complained last week that it was "past time for China to move" on the yuan and lift trade barriers.


Copyright © 2010 AFP. All rights reserved.

China Passes Japan as Second-Largest Economy
The New York Times - On Monday August 16, 2010, 12:20 am EDT

SHANGHAI — After three decades of spectacular growth, China passed Japan in the second quarter to become the world’s second-largest economy behind the United States, according to government figures released early Monday.

The milestone, though anticipated for some time, is the most striking evidence yet that China’s ascendance is for real and that the rest of the world will have to reckon with a new economic superpower.

The recognition came early Monday, when Tokyo said that Japan’s economy was valued at about $1.28 trillion in the second quarter, slightly below China’s $1.33 trillion. Japan’s economy grew 0.4 percent in the quarter, Tokyo said, substantially less than forecast. That weakness suggests that China’s economy will race past Japan’s for the full year.

Experts say unseating Japan — and in recent years passing Germany, France and Great Britain — underscores China’s growing clout and bolsters forecasts that China will pass the United States as the world’s biggest economy as early as 2030. America’s gross domestic product was about $14 trillion in 2009.

“This has enormous significance,” said Nicholas R. Lardy, an economist at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. “It reconfirms what’s been happening for the better part of a decade: China has been eclipsing Japan economically. For everyone in China’s region, they’re now the biggest trading partner rather than the U.S. or Japan.”

For Japan, whose economy has been stagnating for more than a decade, the figures reflect a decline in economic and political power. Japan has had the world’s second-largest economy for much of the last four decades, according to the World Bank. And during the 1980s, there was even talk about Japan’s economy some day overtaking that of the United States.

But while Japan’s economy is mature and its population quickly aging, China is in the throes of urbanization and is far from developed, analysts say, meaning it has a much lower standard of living, as well as a lot more room to grow. Just five years ago, China’s gross domestic product was about $2.3 trillion, about half of Japan’s.

This country has roughly the same land mass as the United States, but it is burdened with a fifth of the world’s population and insufficient resources.

Its per capita income is more on a par with those of impoverished nations like Algeria, El Salvador and Albania — which, along with China, are close to $3,600 — than that of the United States, where it is about $46,000.

Yet there is little disputing that under the direction of the Communist Party, China has begun to reshape the way the global economy functions by virtue of its growing dominance of trade, its huge hoard of foreign exchange reserves and United States government debt and its voracious appetite for oil, coal, iron ore and other natural resources.

China is already a major driver of global growth. The country’s leaders have grown more confident on the international stage and have begun to assert greater influence in Asia, Africa and Latin America, with things like special trade agreements and multibillion dollar resource deals.

“They’re exerting a lot of influence on the global economy and becoming dominant in Asia,” said Eswar S. Prasad, a professor of trade policy at Cornell and former head of the International Monetary Fund’s China division. “A lot of other economies in the region are essentially riding on China’s coat tails, and this is remarkable for an economy with a low per capita income.”

In Japan, the mood was one of resignation. Though increasingly eclipsed by Beijing on the world stage, Japan has benefited from a booming China, initially by businesses moving production there to take advantage of lower wages and, as local incomes have risen, by tapping a large and increasingly lucrative market for Japanese goods.

Beijing is also beginning to shape global dialogues on a range of issues, analysts said; for instance, last year it asserted that the dollar must be phased out as the world’s primary reserve currency.

And while the United States and the European Union are struggling to grow in the wake of the worst economic crisis in decades, China has continued to climb up the economic league tables by investing heavily in infrastructure and backing a $586 billion stimulus plan.

This year, although growth has begun to moderate a bit, China’s economy is forecast to expand about 10 percent — continuing a remarkable three-decade streak of double-digit growth.

“This is just the beginning,” said Wang Tao, an economist at UBS in Beijing. “China is still a developing country. So it has a lot of room to grow. And China has the biggest impact on commodity prices — in Russia, India, Australia and Latin America.”

There are huge challenges ahead, though. Economists say that China’s economy is too heavily dependent on exports and investment and that it needs to encourage greater domestic consumption — something China has struggled to do.

The country’s largely state-run banks have recently been criticized for lending far too aggressively in the last year while shifting some loans off their balance sheet to disguise lending and evade rules meant to curtail lending growth.

China is also locked in a fierce debate over its currency policy, with the United States, European Union and others accusing Beijing of keeping the Chinese currency, the renminbi, artificially low to bolster exports — leading to huge trade surpluses for China but major bilateral trade deficits for the United States and the European Union. China says that its currency is not substantially undervalued and that it is moving ahead with currency reform.

Regardless, China’s rapid growth suggests that it will continue to compete fiercely with the United States and Europe for natural resources but also offer big opportunities for companies eager to tap its market.

Although its economy is still only one-third the size of the American economy, China passed the United States last year to become the world’s largest market for passenger vehicles. China also passed Germany last year to become the world’s biggest exporter.

Global companies like Caterpillar, General Electric, General Motors and Siemens — as well as scores of others — are making a more aggressive push into China, in some cases moving research and development centers here.

Some analysts, though, say that while China is eager to assert itself as a financial and economic power — and to push its state companies to “go global” — it is reluctant to play a greater role in the debate over climate change or how to slow the growth of greenhouse gases.

China passed the United States in 2006 to become the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases, which scientists link to global warming. But China also has an ambitious program to cut the energy it uses for each unit of economic output by 20 percent by the end of 2010, compared to 2006.

Assessing what China’s newfound clout means, though, is complicated. While the country is still relatively poor per capita, it has an authoritarian government that is capable of taking decisive action — to stimulate the economy, build new projects and invest in specific industries.

That, Mr. Lardy at the Peterson Institute said, gives the country unusual power. “China is already the primary determiner of the price of virtually every major commodity,” he said. “And the Chinese government can be much more decisive in allocating resources in a way that other governments of this level of per capita income cannot.”

--------------------

Nik Zafri says : "I've been saying it...for many-many years"...Here's a reminder :

CHINA GOING DOWN? NO WAY!!

CHINA COMING DOWN? NO WAY!! - NIK ZAFRI



This is up to 2005...look at the figures..you all can calculate - can you not?


Once again, some speculators are trying to 'underestimate' China. Last time it was Dubai - now it goes further. The 'bubbly' thing again...there will be bubble in China? What would they think of next? Relive the decoupling theory?

Some people didn't read figures or not bothered with figures and I find this less surprising as these so-called forecasters are not from China. I do not know if the speculators have actually been in China to see for themselves what's happening - US bluechips are coming into China even GM besides than Hewlett Packard & Intel.

Memory serves - In 2009 - China's GDP almost 14% - and this surprised every major banks of the world!! - this year 2010 - it's gonna get BIGGER. The figures originally forecasted by "smart Alexes" were a lot lower and now - they are wrong and still wrong!

One thing I can tell you all that most developing East Asia countries like to stay 'below radar detection' - not to distract too much publicity. China is definitely one of them. They are actually much bigger (as big as Russia) than the formal economists estimation or calculations.

It would not be proper for me to say that China will stay strong in its growth; as well as to other EA countries as well. There may still be minor subprime mortgage crisis elements (I'm saying 'maybe') but China will emerge.

One thing I learn from China's economic aspirations is that the conventional economics 'supply and demand' + 'equilibrium' or 'elasticity' point of view still work on them - where there should be less government intervention (not that we do not need them at all) but to let the market correct by itself. I also share the following views :

a) that (accurate) data collection, analysis and action plan based on these datum are so important,

b) organizations must adopt true corporate governance principles - that is....transparency,

c) bribery must be reduced or better - eliminated!,

d) all taxes must be paid,

e) Work attitude need to be changed - not the system - the system is fine. Don't come out with good figures or window dressings to impress the top management or to get stimulus packages but come out with the REAL figures based on data collection & analysis.

f) Wireless technology/e-commerce/B2B/B2C and all the likes are assets not foes.

g) White Collar Crimes need to be reduced - not on the dumb ones/scapegoats/pawns but on the 'smart ones' abusing their skills

Nik Zafri says :

I like the following article...very honest and very transparent analysis...

Although the article may be the thing of the past (so it seems) but I wish all bankers, investors, newly listed companies, speculators and analysts, economists etc. etc. to read the following article...

Be alert for some strong words but back up with solid facts.

We may take certain reminders so that we shouldn't be over excited of the current market performance but in fact, start working harder to continually improve them (stop sitting in the comfortable zone (not yet)

Also my reminder to all, stop playing the old record by saying that the high quantity of listing/IPOs indicates that the economy is going to be fine...it's the quality that we're talking here NOT quantity.

I think 'designation' of certain stocks by authorities should come in handy - perhaps the right time....but designating stocks should be packaged with clear regulations

Recession-struck Asia to face IPO shortage in 2009

Depressed equity prices, a spreading global recession and increasing risk-aversion among investors are likely to kill the motivation for Asia Pacific companies to be audacious enough to launch IPOs in 2009. The IPO pipeline, which had dried towards the end of 2008, will probably completely shut in the first half of 2009 and the most optimistic are now only hoping that stability will return to stock prices and that a few listings will follow in the second half of the year.

There have been several jumbo IPOs in the Asia Pacific over the past few years through to the first half of 2008. The drivers of this supply were Indian and Chinese companies taking advantage of continued economic growth and investor enthusiasm for exposure in the rising fortunes of the developing world.

This gung-ho mentality was sadly short-lived as these companies’ post-listing performances were disastrous, inflation touched new highs with the advent of recession and the financial sector collapsed under the weight of sub-prime problems.

The pain was particularly felt in the second half of 2008 and IPOs were postponed or completely culled as stock prices and indices plummeted and the probability of raising new money through issuing shares at reasonable valuations completely bit the dust.

A continuation of this surrender to the gloom in global markets is likely to ensure that companies keen on deleveraging will focus on raising equity via secondary placements or private stake sales rather than venture out with IPOs, said bankers.

The outlook for IPOs at least for the first half of 2009 is bleak,” said Simon Cox, head of syndicate at UBS Australia. “Most investors who have cash see enough opportunities in secondary markets every day and are not willing to be tempted to take risk in unknown companies by participating in an IPO unless they are priced very attractively. As a result, companies hardly have any motive to sell into this kind of environment which will kill supply in 2009.”

Signs of a prolonged slowdown in IPO activity are already evident. The Chinese IPO market, the region’s busiest for several years, had a slow start in 2009. The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) has still kept the domestic A-share market shut and only two tiny companies have listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange – the HK$250m (US$32.2m) IPO of mainland oil, petroleum and petrochemical trader Strong Petrochemical and the HK$63m float of China Singyes Solar Technologies.

There is one deal, though, that holds the hopes of all the companies looking to raise new equity. Chinese gold miner Real Gold Mining is braving the market with a US$150m deal and, though the defensive nature of gold could spur some demand, not many are willing to bet on the deal’s success.

Even if it is a success, bankers expect the Chinese IPO market to remain quiet in the first half and to show signs of recovery at best in the second half because of uncertainty about the direction of the global economy. “By that time (mid-year), people should be able to get a more solid view on the global economy and the mere hope of recovery could push up the stock markets and invigorate the IPO market,” said a banker.

When that happens, the infrastructure sector and companies in the retail business segment could be favoured as likely anti-recessionary candidates. “Investors remain picky and they would be only willing to put their money in India or China’s infrastructure and retail which are still considered growth sectors given possibilities demands of their huge populations will continue,” said another banker.

The Chinese government is set to invest Rmb4trn (US$584.4bn) in the country’s infrastructure sector in the next few years and is determined to maintain an 8% GDP growth by supporting domestic demand. India has similar plans to augment its infrastructure and support GDP growth.

The deals that may hit the market, however, would be modestly sized and the super jumbos are likely to be few and far between.

The only known candidate for a jumbo IPO is Agricultural Bank of China, which has plans for a US$20bn–$30bn A/H IPO in 2010. In October last year, Agricultural Bank of China received a US$19bn cash injection from the Chinese government to remove bad debts from its balance sheet and strengthen its capital base before going public. The bank transformed itself into a shareholding company in mid-January and is said to be looking at a Hong Kong and Shanghai IPO.

The Indian market is expected to remain somnolent during the first half as India gears up for its 2009 general elections. The elections are expected in May 2009. Prior to that, the Indian government is unlikely to push forward with any of its privatisations.

What little activity there is now is focused on CB buybacks with Reliance Communications and Jubilant Organosys among those quietly buying back CBs.

“In the Indian context, the market is bound to be turbulent pre-elections. It’s going to be difficult to do any deals. Post elections around June or July, hopefully, the markets will stabilise a bit and we could start seeing companies desperate to raise cash tapping the market in the fourth quarter,” said one Indian ECM banker.

And that is likely to be the trend in the rest of the region. Within South-East Asia, ECM activity will be driven primarily by recapitalisations, particularly within the FIG and real estate sectors, largely through rights issues. South-East Asian issuers tend to be family or major shareholder dominated, and rights issues backed by promoters will continue to be the prevailing trend.

“We are waiting for more rights issues out of Singapore. People are looking at issuers like CapitaLand, CapitaCommercial Trust and CapitaMall Trust to tap the market and we expect more fundraising within the REIT space. Our visibility for IPOs in SEA is minimal, so I definitely think it will be secondary fund raising and recapitalisations,” said another banker.

Although the past few months have been desolate for ECM bankers, there could be a pick-up in equity issuance towards the second half of 2009 as issuers find themselves faced with no funding alternatives.

“The IPO market is dead…The rescue rights or rescue placements in Europe will probably follow through to Asia, but Asian issuers have to swallow their pride first and take the decision to issue equity. If debt markets remain closed, they will have no choice, at some point the penny will drop,” said one Hong Kong-based Southeast Asian banker.

In Korea, the healthy IPO pipeline has imploded with first life insurers and then construction firms falling off the map. A market plunge, where the Kospi drifted below 1,000 for the first time in three years, and a subsequent liquidity squeeze has set a bleak tone for 2009 and bankers are struggling to find candidates to come to the market.

If markets were to improve, bankers think it will be the life insurers that will return first with Tongyang Life Insurance regarded as the most likely candidate. Tongyang Life came close to listing last summer but was forced to pull the deal at the last moment and has since renewed its listing filing twice with the latest deadline extended to August.

Bankers are not confident that Tongyang Life can meet that timetable but they suggested that if the deal could get done this year then other life insurers like Kumho Life and Mirae Asset Life would follow.

Also on bankers’ radars are a string of deals from Hyundai-related companies with Hyundai Motor rumoured to be considering spinning off Hyundai Card and Hyundai Capital while Hyundai Group considers a listing of Hyundai Logistics and Hyundai Home Shopping.

Bankers said that although the Hyundai deals inflated their pipeline, the execution of such deals would depend on whether the Hyundai Group was willing to use its cash piles to support the businesses and avoid a listing.

“The problem with a lot of the listing candidates is that they are backed by Korea’s industry giants and conglomerates. There is no real urgency to get these firms to the market,” one banker noted.

That argument can probably be best applied to the listing plans of Korea’s construction firms, including Posco Engineering and Construction and Lotte Engineering and Construction and Hyundai Engineering and Construction, which were all expected to list in 2008/2009 but have recently reversed those plans. Bankers blamed the cancellation of their listing plans on a strategic decision to lean more heavily on their chaebol relationships than the public markets.

And in Australia it will be difficult to see any IPOs being done in 2009, especially after the few that got done in 2008 were disastrous for investors. BrisConnections which did a huge IPO in 2008 saw its partially paid A$1 shares falling to a record low of A$0.001 post-listing. IvanHoe Mines also did one that was the year’s second largest IPO but are trading way below their issue price.

Against that background, reviving investor confidence for IPOs will be difficult.

“There could be opportunities of IPOs by diversified companies demerging to realise value in specific units or even venture capital/private equity selling off stakes but those deals in this depressed environment will have to be priced relatively cheap. . .we are not recommending our clients to go ahead and do IPOs in this environment,” said one banker.

Shankar Ramakrishnan, Fiona Lau, Denise Wee, Govinda Finn

To recover or not to recover?

Analysts these days are expecting (or speculating) recessions whether we're in L, U, V, W shapes.

Not a very long time ago, we faced difficulties in the construction projects - both material and labour. Richness have favoured oil exporters after the price was USD147/barrel. Then, we see light at the end of the tunnel for India and especially China - attaining good results instead of recession (China - the next country that will save the world? - we'll see) Next, we also see good signs in Australia and Canada as well.

US have been good before the subprime mortgage crisis that affect the whole world - thanks to capitalism. Now, it appears that; apart from US; almost every country in the West is in dire economic straits and surprisingly affecting the birthrate as well. Healthcare now is becoming a trend just like bailouts and stimulus. National debt and deficit to rations of Gross Domestic Product are alarmingly high. Many are now debt-laden. These unstable conditions may have hard effects on USD.

How are we doing today? Mr. World Economics?
By Nik Zafri - Oct 7, 2009

Ok..to start with - Oil (Asia)...Source NYME - November benchmark crude up 63 cents - $71.51 by 12.30 pm and contract settled at $70.88 - a rise of 47 cents. For US (Dow Jones gaining 1.4%), it's the best achievement and a good sign for prospects of more corporate profits.

A sign of recovery? Perhaps - Oil markets & equities are being driven by this recovery.

There is another paradox though - if crude inventories fall, oil prices may rise further and price will fall if crude stocks rise. I hope if this happens, the strong financial market will back it up.

Global Economic Stimulus Package - I'm glad that our global economy now can withstand higher borrowing cost - despite there are talks about interest hike yet world Governments spending and offers of low interest rates are now emerging.

Next - Inflation vs interest rate hikes. Some countries in the Asia-Pacific Region expected a building trend of inflation (Australia recently raise their key interest rates (official cash rate by 25 basis points to 3.25%) - which is OK to them) due to recent hike 'Downunder' - there is a possibility that 'everyone else' will follow this trend.

Thus, if there is a plan to raise interest...I can understand why (we must be fair to the Banking and Financial instititutions as well) but please monitor the inflation possibilty..if there is such sign (in Malaysia specifically), please control it.

Bonds - Reports came to me that in some countries - Traders are buying after the fall. Yields are retreating (on the benchmark one decade bond yield now closing lower - During the early deals, it's rising due to lacking of buyback news - something to look at before )

Before I move on : Anyone heard of the so called secret talks between the Gulf states? I heard stories about China and Russia are replacing oil trading with dollar which may have caused the decline is USD?

Next - USD vs Gold vs other currency - I think everyone is noticing that USD is falling against major currency. Thus gold are rallying on the bullion markets and silver surges higher. (Dollar is now the 'arc nemesis' to gold = Gold is used for safe hedge against inflation whenever the Dollar is down)

The death of the 'decoupling' theory?

By Conrad de Aenlle Published: January 25, 2008

Traders work on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange in New York, U.S., on Tuesday, Jan. 22, 2008. U.S. stocks pared their biggest decline since 2002 after the Federal Reserve's emergency rate cut helped mitigate concern the economy is slipping into recession. (Jin Lee/Bloomberg News)

No one can say how much has been lost by investors basing decisions on unproven strategies that work in theory, but the amount has grown significantly. As trillions of dollars were wiped off the value of global stocks this week, "decoupling" became the latest big idea to shrink dramatically when tested in the real world.

Decoupling holds that European and Asian economies, especially emerging ones, have broadened and deepened to the point that they no longer depend on the United States for growth, leaving them insulated from a severe slowdown there, even a fully fledged recession. Faith in the concept has generated strong outperformance for stocks outside the United States - until now.

As opinion began to solidify after the start of the year that a recession, or something close to it, was likely in the United States, stock prices accelerated their declines, with the selling intensifying early this week. Contrary to what the decouplers would have expected, the losses were greater outside the United States, with the worst experienced in emerging markets and such developed economies as Germany and Japan.

Exports make up especially large portions of economic activity in those places, but that was not supposed to matter anymore in a decoupled world because domestic activity was thought to be so robust.

Decoupling was all the rage early last year when international financial markets all but ignored the increasing turmoil in the U.S. economy and stock market. Investment advisers point out, however, that the segments of the U.S. economy that were showing wear and tear then were those to which the rest of the world would never be heavily exposed. That is no longer true, they say, and markets are responding accordingly.

"Decoupling is yesterday's story," Stuart Schweitzer, a global strategist at J.P. Morgan Private Bank, declared. "Last year, when the U.S. slowdown was driven almost entirely by housing, it made sense that the rest of the world kept right on going. Housing is a domestic story, plain and simple.

"The nature of the slowdown has changed in two key respects. The credit crunch that began in midsummer is not just a U.S. phenomenon; the rise in risk aversion is global and will have an impact on credit terms and availability everywhere. And we're finally seeing evidence that the U.S. job market is losing steam and consumer spending is slowing."

True believers in decoupling have ignored another theory that appears to be logically inconsistent with it, has been popular for far longer and, most important, has been shown to work in real life. Remember globalization?

"If anything, global interdependence of economies is rising, not falling," said Jeff Applegate, chief investment officer of Citi Global Wealth Management.

"The notion that the U.S. can go into recession with no negative knock-on effect in the rest of the world doesn't hold up."

Andrew Foster, head of equity research for Matthews International Capital, a specialist in Asian markets, contends that it is possible for globalization and decoupling to coexist. In fact, one gave rise to the other, he said. It was only through economic liberalization that the juggernaut economies of Asia were able to grow as fast as they have, allowing for the development of conspicuously consuming middle classes.

"The irony is that these economies are more coupled with the rest of the world than they ever were in the past," he said. "That's why they're so strong, and that has allowed them to become more independent."

The new Asian consumers may not be able to compensate for all of the exports that would be lost during an American recession, Foster said, but some of the companies that serve their needs might still do all right for themselves. The true decoupling may be not so much between the United States and the rest of the world as between segments of the global economy that cater to the burgeoning nouveau riche in emerging economies on one hand and most other commercial sectors on the other.

With the United States apparently tipping over into recession, Foster is looking to fill his Asia portfolios with the first type of businesses, as long as they have not been bid up to unreasonable levels already. A couple of pockets of opportunity that he finds are Chinese insurance companies and Indian health care providers.

"I like companies that don't derive their fortunes from products, services and especially commodities dominated by the global business cycle," he said, although he declined to furnish examples.

Valuation is also critical for Michael Avery, chief investment officer of Waddell & Reed and a professed believer in decoupling - up to a point. He noted that the concept began to pop into the heads of professional investors, including his, during the last U.S. recession, in 2001-2002, although it had not yet achieved buzzword status.

"A lot of people in our business were thinking about where the world was going to head in a post-9/11 environment," Avery recalled. "The U.S. economy had slowed dramatically in 2001, and you had places in the world like China and India that continued to grow at mid- to high single digits. That set in motion the thinking that the U.S. might not be the leading economic force going forward."

But while he accepts the basic idea of economic decoupling, he is not fanatical about it as an investment theme, at least not now. The emerging world will grow faster than the United States, in his view, but Avery doubts that sufficient growth can be achieved to justify the valuations being put on companies in those markets by the new wave of decoupling adherents.

"The big difference in 2002 is that not many people placed bets on that outcome, so there wasn't much risk," he said.

"Now I can go anywhere, and if I talk about China and India and the emerging middle class, they all nod their heads. It's a huge difference from five years ago."

Avery still finds value in some domestically oriented sectors in Asia, as well as in Middle Eastern markets that continue to benefit from one key export, crude oil. He noted that while exports to the United States of less viscous products may be at risk, the growth of middle-class spending is promoting a healthy expansion of trade within the emerging world.

Avery made a big bet on declining share prices late last year when he sold short derivative contracts tied to benchmark stock indexes. But his Ivy Asset Strategy Fund has substantial holdings in such plays on emerging-market domestic demand as the phone company China Mobile; Veolia Environnement, a French producer of water treatment systems, and Las Vegas Sands, an American hotel and casino operator expanding into Macao.

In addition to selling stock index futures, Avery has about 10 percent of his portfolio each in gold, cash and Treasury bonds as hedges against the uncertainties and jolts that would accompany a U.S. recession.

Tim Guinness, chairman and chief investment officer of Guinness Atkinson Asset Management, is another whose objection to decoupling is more a matter of how it works in practice.

"I'm a moderate decoupling believer," he acknowledged. "I'm in the camp that believes that China is rapidly moving from being dependent on exports to the U.S. to enjoying a virtuous circle of rapidly rising incomes for Chinese consumers and very strong momentum behind internally driven growth."

There is momentum in China's stock market, too, he noted, but in a different direction. Perhaps the biggest beneficiary of decoupling is giving back much of its enormous gains of the last few years as investors break faith with the concept.

"I prefer China, but not today," Guinness said. "The next few months will see a continued retreat in China-related stocks. The correction already has been very pronounced."

He prefers less bubbly stock markets in emerging economies where domestic demand is strong, like South Korea and Thailand. Individual stocks that he favors include PTT in Thailand, Singapore Petroleum and Cemig, a Brazilian hydroelectric company.

Applegate, at Citi, finds stocks better value than bonds. He particularly likes global banks and stocks in Europe and emerging markets generally, although he considers China and Hong Kong fairly pricey.

Bonds and equities have experienced sharply diverging fortunes recently. Many stock markets are more than 20 percent below their 2007 highs, while yields on government bonds have plummeted, sending their prices aloft.

Movements in both markets suggest that investors are factoring a global recession into their thinking, a development that could set the stage for the next rally in stocks and render the decoupling argument moot.

Another theory, with a proven track record, states that stocks should be bought once the economy is recognized to be in recession. By then, share prices account for all or most of the bad news, the authorities have taken steps to correct imbalances and a recovery is often imminent.

"Play the movie forward," Applegate said. "If the economy is going to soften globally, then can you expect more central bank policy response? The answer is a resounding yes."

In such conditions, he said, "you should have more of a preference for equities over bonds."

--------------------------------------------------

Nik Zafri's Comments : I've been saying it!!!

This was what I've said few months back :

Many have forecasted that SEA will be the first to rebound from the current economic crisis by September, 2009.

On the other hand, what saddens me most is that some even forecasted that Asian economy will fall badly in 2009 - such a pathetic statement meant to discourage us.

In the past, we have been known for the reputation of outperforming the US and Europe due to the right planning and eventually become very immune to any credit crunch from the West.

Some countries are not even depending on IMF or World Bank in 1997-1998-remember? Even China has been too much underestimated (not that I disagree but too much 'smart' speculations..come on) by these 'so-called' economic forecasters.

I have always been known as a 'reverse psychological' person. I don't believe in 'too obvious bad news' being reported meant to lure the small investors away but giving great monetary advantages to speculators.

Based on these 'unfounded fears', I feel strongly that the Asian will be one of the key players in the world economy commencing from 2009.

But of course, I have a different theory (especially for Malaysia) - I think it's earlier than that...say April, 2009?

AND

Where would be the ideal starting point? The answer is the first tier - Banking and Financial Institutions. I would like to open this suggestion to Asia (or SEA) as Asia is a very unique continent that has always found a way towards survival. (perhaps some democratization of financial policies should be in place) Most important is TRUST and coordinated efforts one another - as every bankers and financiers have all the knowledge. (Don't wait for someone else to start first) There should be no more too much dependency on certain elite groups or industries that are 'controlling the financial world' and we have seen the impact when these 'big mega industries' started to fall
-------------------------------

Today...I'm so happy to see THIS NEWS :

From The Star 21 February, 2009:

Asean to seek consensus on RM308b common fund

PHUKET: Malaysia, along with other Asean members, will meet tomorrow to seek consensus on a multi-billion dollar Asean+3 Cooperation Fund for economic stimulus packages.

Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak will lead the Malaysian delegation at the special meeting among Asean finance ministers, together with their counterparts from China, Japan and South Korea.

The meeting is to formalise a common fund aimed at bolstering foreign exchange reserves to cope with the global economic crisis.

Under the Chiang Mai Initiative Multilateralisation Scheme, Asean members, Japan, China and South Korea have agreed to create a pool of US$84bil (RM308bil). The fund, which was agreed to in May last year, is to help boost forex reserves among member countries.

China, Japan and South Korea will contribute 80% of the fund while the remaining 10 Asean countries will come up with the rest.

A Malaysian Finance Ministry official said Asean finance ministers would also discuss methods to protect the region’s economy and other joint initiatives to overcome the current economic slum.

“Asean finance ministers are also expected to discuss and raise the fund to US$120bil (RM441bil) to help revive the region’s economy.

“The meeting will also seek views on ways to tackle the current economic issues as well as enhancing the regional trade and financial markets corporation.”
---------------------------
Nik's comments :

The RIGHT MOVE!! GO FOR IT!!

Personal Note : I sure hope President Obama sees this.

NIK ZAFRI'S (HUMBLE) ASIA/SEA ECONOMICAL FORECAST 2009

Many have forecasted that SEA will be the first to rebound from the current economic crisis by September, 2009.

On the other hand, what saddens me most is that some even forecasted that Asian economy will fall badly in 2009 - such a pathetic statement meant to discourage us.
In the past, we have been known for the reputation of outperforming the US and Europe due to the right planning and eventually become very immune to any credit crunch from the West.

Some countries are not even depending on IMF or World Bank in 1997-1998-remember? Even China has been too much underestimated (not that I disagree but too much 'smart' speculations..come on) by these 'so-called' economic forecasters.

I have always been known as a 'reverse psychological' person. I don't believe in 'too obvious bad news' being reported meant to lure the small investors away but giving great monetary advantages to speculators.

Based on these 'unfounded fears', I feel strongly that the Asian will be one of the key players in the world economy commencing from 2009.

But of course, I have a different theory (especially for Malaysia) - I think it's earlier than that...say April, 2009?

But, I share the agreement that it is likely going to be Singapore then probably followed by Malaysia. There have been a trend of banking and financial institutions in these two neighbouring countries offering new packages to GLCs and MNCs. These efforts would probably contribute to economy recovery in 2009. There has also been a higher demand for exports from Malaysia and Singapore based on the increased spending in the Euro and US.

The banking sectors in Japan are planning to buy securities, stocks and bonds (corporate) etc - and if these plan works, it will help stabilise their financial market. The Government has announce Japan's biggest ever annual budget Y12,000bn.

China however would still have to be put under alert - to grow or not to grow. Since China are trading with other SEA countries, their ability to export surplus stocks financed on credit should be monitored. New policies to boost consumption need to be drawn up to counter this possibility. I do know that China works very-very hard lately not to be bound to 'intelligent economic comments' e.g. decoupling - and I have every confident that they will succeed.

In Indonesia, the President announce the budget of USD200 billion ++ and a 6.2% growth is expected. However, they are not too sure about the outcome of issuance of Government bonds and probably there will be a budget deficit of nearly 2% GDP. Mainly taxes will play a role for the main revenue followed by non-tax sectors. There will also be about 102 trillion rupiah for fuel subsidy.

The only biggest dillema in Indonesia is corruption - if this is not being minimized, I do not think that they can reach the target that they are hoping for. While for the good part that Indonesia has done right is their achievement of regaining self-sufficiency in rice where the production has surpassed the country's rice consumption. This has made them better in terms of food situation and probably would take them out of the current global food crisis.

For Korea, they are not too ambitious; which I find a good thing to do - be cautious. While everyone is hoping and praying for a 2009 turnaround, Korea predicted a 3% growth and the focus is mainly creating new job opportunity. They have also cut taxes here and there.

Korean consumer price is estimated to stabilize to less than 4% and there may also be decreasing service deficitit and rising goods surplus - thus making 2009 account surplus to exceed USD10 billion. I personally think that Korea should now put an effort to minimize their dependency on IMF as what they have done before in 1997.

I will keep you all updated.

Hi everyone!!

It's been a while...dropping by to share a very good article which has caused me some delay in submitting a very important document to the client.

Luckily my client called me up to remind me...

---------------------------------------
Speeches, Testimony, Papers
Global Economic Prospects 2008/2009: Hoping for a Global Slowdown and a US Recession
by Michael Mussa, Peterson Institute

Paper presented at the thirteenth semiannual meeting on Global Economic Prospects
April 3, 2008

© Peterson institute for International Economics. All rights reserved.

Overview

After four years of average annual global real GDP growth of better than 4 1/2 percent, recent data indicate that the pace of advance is slowing in the major industrial countries, with the US economy on the verge of, and perhaps already in, outright recession. So far, the evidence points to less of a slowdown in other industrial countries, while most emerging-market economies appear likely to maintain quite strong, albeit somewhat slower, growth.

Meanwhile, world consumer price inflation (on a 12-month basis) is up from barely 2 percent seven years ago to nearly 5 percent as of February 2008. Among both industrial (except for Japan) and major emerging-market countries, inflation is now running at, or in most cases somewhat above, rates consistent with policy objectives. Driven by persistently rising global demand, commodity prices continue to surge upward across the board, especially measured in US dollars but also in terms of the rapidly appreciating euro.

In this situation, the world economy really needs what is now forecast for 2008/2009: a significant slowing of economic growth, down to 3.8 percent (year over year) in 2008 from 4.7 percent in 2007.1 This slowdown will be led by a decline of demand growth in the US economy, which is both pronounced and extends over a considerable period. Indeed, in view of the exceptionally aggressive easing of macroeconomic policies already in place in the United States and the likelihood of monetary policy remaining highly accommodative so long as US financial markets remain under stress, it is now desirable that real GDP growth for 2008 fall to a forecasted rate of barely more than 1 percent (year over year)—an outcome consistent with a very mild and brief recession. Reflecting some risk of a somewhat deeper and more prolonged recession in the United States, the growth forecast for 2009 (year over year) is set at 2 percent.

For the rest of the world, a mild US recession in 2008 will have a modest negative effect on real GDP growth, with more significant impacts in Mexico and Canada. In countries where the slowdown threatens to become excessive and inflation is under control, some easing of monetary and perhaps fiscal policy is both likely and appropriate. More generally, however, it is too soon to call for a general and significant easing of macroeconomic policies. A general slowdown in global economic growth is needed to cool the clearly apparent upsurge in worldwide inflation.

Some countries, including Australia, China, and Sweden, have recently tightened monetary policies in efforts to forestall inflation. Other countries, including Canada and the United Kingdom, have eased monetary policies modestly in response to weakening economic growth. Quite appropriately, however, no country has so far followed the lead of the Federal Reserve in aggressive monetary easing.

As the custodian of the world's second most important currency, the policy of the European Central Bank (ECB) is particularly noteworthy. Inflation in the euro area is running more than a percentage point above the ECB's announced objective. The euro area economy has recently been growing significantly more rapidly than its potential rate of about 1 1/2 percent. The unemployment rate has fallen half a percentage point below the minimum reached in the last expansion. Key monetary aggregates are surging at rates well above their desired target ranges. In this situation, one would normally have expected the ECB to have raised its key policy interest rate a further 100 basis points since last summer.

Instead, with financial turbulence spreading to some extent from the United States to euro area financial markets and institutions, with evidence that euro area economies are beginning to slow, and with a sharp appreciation of the euro against the dollar, which is likely to slow growth and impede inflation, the ECB has wisely held back from further interest rate increases. With the euro area economy now expected to expand by about 1 1/2 percent this year (in line with potential), the timing and direction of future adjustments in ECB interest rates remain—appropriately—dependent upon the evolving balance of risks for inflation and economic growth.

For Japan, the strengthening of the yen against the dollar in recent months and weakening of exports to the United States, together with likely weakness in domestic demand growth, suggest a further write-down in the forecast for real GDP growth for 2008 to 1.2 percent (from 1¾ percent forecast last October). This reflects the assumption that the surprising upsurge of GDP growth in the final quarter of 2007 will be partly offset in the first half of this year.

For the industrial countries as a group, real GDP growth this year is now forecast to be 1.5 percent, and growth for 2009 is projected to be moderately stronger at about 1.9 percent.

In emerging-market economies, circumstances vary and so do appropriate policies, but the general prospect is for continued quite strong economic growth, despite the slowdown in the industrial countries.

Is this "decoupling?" Not really. Mexico, Caribbean and Central American countries, and Asian economies that are particularly dependent on exports to the United States are already feeling and will continue to feel the effects of the US economic slowdown. More broadly, however, strong growth of domestic demand in many emerging-market economies will sustain reasonably strong GDP growth, and rising demand for raw materials by key emerging-market economies, most importantly China, will help keep commodity prices strong and aid growth in other emerging-market economies.

Overall, I forecast that growth for developing and emerging-market economies as a group this year will be about 6 1/2 percent, down from almost a 7 1/2 percent advance in 2007. For 2009, I now project slightly slower growth. The slowdown will be more severe, however, if growth in the industrial countries, especially the United States, turns out to be meaningfully below the present forecast. Exports from emerging-market countries would then be hit in volume terms, and prices of commodity exports could take a serious tumble. Some developing countries, especially among the primary commodity exporters, could face serious economic challenges and potential crises.

On this occasion, Arvind Subramanian is available to share his expertise on emerging-market economies, particularly in Asia and especially India. Accordingly, I will limit my remarks on these economies to selected observations on some key emerging-market countries. Then, in view of the departure from the Institute of my colleague Martin Baily and the (at least) temporary absence of Douglas Holtz-Eakin, I will turn to discuss growth prospects in the industrial countries, especially the United States. This should provide background for Morris Goldstein's more in-depth observations on the present financial crisis and proposals for reform.

Sustained Growth in Emerging Markets

China's economy continues to surge forward, so much so that the authorities are tightening policies to cool down inflation. Growth will likely slow from 11 1/2 percent last year to about 10 percent this year and next. On the policy front, the key action that should be taken—but that the Chinese authorities have so far refused—is a significant step appreciation of the renminbi against the dollar and in real effective terms, combined with policies to stimulate domestic demand.

In the rest of emerging Asia, growth will likely moderate somewhat in 2008 and 2009 but stay above 6 percent, with India continuing to grow at nearly 8 percent.

In Latin America, Mexico will suffer spillover effects from the slowing US economy, and growth this year is likely to fall to about 2 1/2 percent before recovering modestly in 2009. In contrast, Brazil should be able to sustain growth of nearly 5 percent, despite the strong appreciation of the real against the dollar. Growth in Argentina and Venezuela is expected to slow from the high rates of recent years, bringing down the growth rate for all of Latin America to about 4 1/2 percent this year and slightly less in 2009.

For Central and Eastern Europe, weak growth in Hungary and Turkey hurt regional performance in 2007 and partly offset strong results in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Poland, and Slovakia. For 2008 and 2009, regional growth will likely run about 4 percent, reflecting partly the impact of slower growth in Western Europe.

In the Commonwealth of Independent States, the dominant Russian economy should continue to grow at about 7 percent, and growth rates will likely remain somewhat higher (on average) in the smaller economies.

For the Middle East, high oil prices will help keep growth strong in the energy-exporting countries. The larger and more diversified economies of Egypt and Israel should also maintain growth rates in the 5 percent range.

High commodity prices will continue to benefit many African countries, and growth in the region appears likely to continue at least at a 5 percent rate.

Slowing in Other Industrial Countries

Among the industrial countries other than the United States, growth will slow significantly from the 2 3/4 percent advance of 2007 to barely more than 1 1/2 percent this year. However, aside from the United States, I see significant risk of recession this year only in Japan and possibly Italy. The impact of the yen's recent appreciation and weakening of exports to the United States, together with deteriorating sentiment among Japanese businesses and consumers, could push GDP into a couple of quarters of negative growth, even if year-over-year growth remains slightly positive. And the Japanese policy authorities have little room to provide offsetting stimulus.

In Canada, growth this year will likely fall a little below 2 percent, under the impact of slowing US growth and a strong Canadian dollar. However, solid income growth from strong export revenues should keep domestic demand relatively robust, and the Canadian authorities have considerable room to ease policy should that appear needed to forestall very weak growth or recession.

In the United Kingdom, growth this year is also likely to slow to slightly less than 2 percent. But this is not entirely unwelcome in view of the need to curb inflationary pressures, and the Bank of England has plenty of room to ease further should that appear warranted. The Reserve Bank of Australia has continued to tighten in recent months and would surely welcome the forecasted slowing of growth to 3 percent this year.

In the euro area, as previously noted, the projected slowing of growth this year to 1.6 percent from 2.6 percent last year involves nothing more than slowing to the potential growth rate. The slowdown will affect all countries in the area. The Italian economy looks likely to be extremely sluggish and is at some risk of falling into recession. Growth should remain stronger in Germany, sustained by good export performance in the face of weaker consumer demand. France will lag slightly behind Germany, while Spain will slow considerably due to a sharp downturn in home building. The slowdown will probably be reflected in a small uptick in unemployment and will be unpopular with most politicians. However, with inflation running well above the ECB's tolerance rate of 2 percent, the central bank is likely to see the slowing of growth more as a solution than as a problem.

A Mild US Recession

Despite signs of increasing financial strains, the US economy achieved almost 5 percent annualized growth in the third quarter of last year. Economic data that became available through Christmas indicated that the economy was still expanding through November. The data since late December, however, suggest that economic activity has been no better than flat and probably modestly declining since very late last year. The economic data do not indicate an economy that is crashing into steep recession.

The three most recent monthly employment reports have shown small declines in private-sector jobs. Weekly initial unemployment claims have risen from around 300,000 to slightly over 350,000. Residential investment continues to decline. The boom in nonresidential construction appears to have peaked. Data on durable goods orders and shipments suggest weak or even declining business equipment investment. As should be expected in the face of falling home prices and household wealth, sharp increases in energy and food prices, and stagnating employment, real consumer spending has not increased since November—but it has not declined.

Net exports are probably continuing to improve, but this will not be enough to offset weakness in the other components of final demand. Annualized real GDP growth in the first quarter will likely be modestly negative—probably between minus one-half and minus one percent in the first quarter. (And, if there is a modestly positive result, it will probably reflect an upsurge in inventory investment, which is not a positive sign for future growth.)

The second quarter may see moderation in the pace of decline of residential investment, but the other elements of domestic demand are likely to remain weak. Another quarter of modestly negative real GDP growth now seems to be the most likely outcome. Whether this will be enough to persuade the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) to proclaim an official recession is not clear, but I would now put the likelihood of such a recession at over 50 percent.

By June, the tax cuts from the recently passed fiscal package will be flowing into consumers pockets, bumping up consumer spending mainly in the third quarter. Some, not unreasonable, forecasts suggest that the stimulus could induce as much as a 5 percent annualized gain of real consumer spending in the third quarter, implying a considerable temporary boost to GDP growth. My view is more restrained, partly because I expect that businesses will absorb some of any surge in consumption spending (particularly for durables) into reductions in inventories.

On the other hand, businesses have kept inventories quite lean for the past three years, and there is no indication of a general inventory overhang (aside from the stockpile of unsold homes, which is not counted in business inventories). Sharp declines of inventory investment into negative territory have been a feature of all ten postwar recessions. It is a positive sign that the magnitude of any inventory correction in the present episode appears likely to be limited.

In sum, the prospect is that with the benefit of the fiscal stimulus, the US economy will bounce back to moderately positive growth this summer. By then the massive contraction of residential investment, which began two years ago, should be complete—with new home building running just below one million units, less than half of its recent peak level. Growth of consumer spending is likely to be weak after the effects of the stimulus are spent, but inventory investment should bounce back, and net exports may be expected to continue to make positive contributions to GDP growth. During the second half of 2008, it is reasonable to expect growth to rebound to 2 to 3 percent.

The suggested pattern of modestly falling GDP in the first half and moderate rebound in the second half implies that real GDP will show a very meager advance of about one-half percent on a fourth-quarter-to-fourth-quarter basis. Year-over-year real GDP growth would be barely more than 1 percent. In comparison, in the 2001 recession—the mildest of the postwar era—fourth-quarter-to-fourth-quarter growth was 0.4 percent and year-over-year growth was 0.8 percent.

The 2001 recession was followed by an initially weak recovery, with real GDP growing at only a 1.7 percent rate during the six quarters after the official end of recession, and with the unemployment rate continuing to rise to a peak of 6.3 percent in May 2003. On this occasion, I expect that the economy will remain quite sluggish through 2009, with growth proceeding at about a 2 percent annual rate. Weak growth of consumer spending in the face of significant losses of household net worth associated with lower real home values will be the key reason for this sluggishness.

Partly offsetting weak consumer spending growth will be continued improvement in US net exports, reflecting both slow import growth and continued rapid export growth. With the usual lag, the substantial depreciation of the dollar over the past year will contribute to the improvement in US net exports in 2009 and beyond.

We see here what I earlier called "reverse coupling." From 1995 through 2004, relatively strong growth of domestic demand in the United States and the effects of a strong dollar (with lags extending this effect) led to persistent deterioration in US real net exports. Thus, the United States was exporting demand to the rest of the world at a time when domestic demand growth in the rest of the world was relatively sluggish.

This process has been operating in reverse since the summer of 2006. Slower domestic demand growth in the United States, combined with stronger demand growth abroad and the effects of a significantly weaker dollar, have begun to significantly improve US real net exports. Thus, during the past year and a half, the rest of the world economy has been helping to pull the US economy along. This process may continue for several years as consumer spending growth in the United States remains restrained by the effects of lower household wealth, making room for expanding the supply of US net exports without contributing to inflationary pressures in the United States. For this process to continue relatively smoothly, however, the rest of the world needs to sustain reasonably robust demand growth and the United States needs to avoid too sharp a decline in domestic demand. The adjustment of the foreign exchange value of the dollar, which is essential for this process, is now largely complete, except for the needed appreciations of some Asian currencies, most notably the Chinese renminbi.

Turmoil in Global Financial Markets

A key feature and source of uncertainty in the present economic situation is the continuing turmoil in financial markets, especially in the United States but with spillovers to Europe and to a limited extent (so far) to Japan and emerging markets. Global equity markets have sold off amidst the turmoil, but markets for credit instruments and financial institutions dealing in such instruments have been most affected.

Three issues concerning this financial-market turmoil deserve special attention:

(1) What has caused this financial turmoil, notwithstanding strenuous efforts by the Federal Reserve and other central banks to contain it?

(2) What risks does it pose to the global economy?

(3) Have the policy responses been adequate and appropriate?

Regarding the causes of the turmoil, it is noteworthy that it has been most severe in US financial markets and institutions. Europe and, to a lesser extent, Canada and Japan have also been affected. In these other countries, a few institutions (such as the mortgage lender Northern Rock in the United Kingdom) have gotten into trouble on their own, related to their domestic activities. But most of the problems faced by non-US institutions have arisen because of their involvement with financial instruments originating in the United States.

In the United States, the initial underlying difficulties arose from subprime mortgages and financial instruments involving such mortgages. However, the crisis is much broader and deeper and has gone on longer than can plausibly be explained by this underlying cause. Across quite a broad spectrum, credit markets have become illiquid and dysfunctional. Interest rate spreads relative to US Treasury obligations have shot up and remained high and volatile even for higher-quality credits. Markets for important classes of bundled instruments have frozen up, and values for some of these instruments—to the extent that they can be determined—have plummeted. All this turmoil, well beyond what can plausibly be explained by developments in the real economy, indicates that financial markets and institutions themselves are mainly responsible for the crisis.

The extent of this crisis in credit markets is even more remarkable in view of the exceedingly aggressive actions taken by the Federal Reserve and the important but less aggressive actions of other leading central banks. Contrary to the nonsense spoken by many financial-market commentators, the Federal Reserve has not been "behind the curve" in its policy response. In fact, the easing of US monetary policy in the present possible recession has far outstripped the pace of easing in past actual recessions. On top of this, the Federal Reserve has recently taken truly extraordinary actions to extend specific liquidity support to a wide range of US financial institutions.

The official explanation for these extraordinary actions is not that they are motivated primarily by the desire to protect financial institutions from losses but rather to head off the risk of major damage to the general economy spreading from difficulties in the financial sector. So far, however, there is little indication that the general economy is suffering much damage from the credit market turmoil—beyond some deepening of the downturn in US residential investment. In particular, the present slowdown in the US economy and around the world is not much more than what we would normally have expected in view of falling home values, higher food and energy prices, and other developments aside from the turmoil in credit markets.

Does this imply that the Federal Reserve, in its efforts to protect the financial sector, has overreacted to the credit market turmoil? Has it eased too aggressively, unduly raising the risk of inflation down the road? Has its rescue of the financial sector by cutting massively the cost of funds and the provision of specific liquidity support generated far too much moral hazard relative to the value of the protective effect of these actions against real hazards faced by the general economy?

At this point, the answers to these questions are not entirely clear, but two conclusions can be reached with high confidence. First, given the massive easing already undertaken by the Federal Reserve and the likelihood of some modest further easing, the US economy now needs to undergo at least a near recession if the Federal Reserve's easing is not to be excessive. Second, if the Federal Reserve's highly aggressive actions have really been warranted to protect the economy from substantial harm, then deep reforms of the financial system, including the Federal Reserve's policies and practices, are clearly needed to reduce the likelihood of such problems in the future. The Federal Reserve cannot pose only as the hero riding to the rescue of the economy and the financial system. Its role as one of the villains whose earlier actions and inactions contributed to the present crisis needs to be fully and carefully assessed.


Table 1 Real GDP growth projections as of April 3, 2008 (percent change, year over year)




Note

1. The figures for global GDP growth are aggregated from the growth rates for individual countries using purchasing power parity (PPP)–based measures of exchange rates employed by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in its World Economic Outlook (WEO). Based on a major study supported by the World Bank, estimates of PPP exchange rates have recently been substantially revised, with the general result that the weights in world GDP of the industrial countries have been somewhat increased while those of emerging-market economies have been correspondingly reduced. Because emerging-market economies, most notably China and India, have been growing far more rapidly than most industrial countries in recent years, the effect of the revision in PPP exchange rates is to lower the figure for global growth (without changing growth rates for individual countries) by about 1/2 percentage point. Thus the present estimate for global growth of 4 3/4 percent in 2007 under the new PPP-based exchange rates corresponds to an estimate of 5 1/4 percent growth under the old weights. The weights used in table 1 are estimates of the weights that the IMF will use for the forecast to be reported in the current WEO.
---------------------------------------
RESPONSE FROM MELBOURNIAN AND COUNTER-RESPONSE FROM NIK ZAFRI - IN GLOBAL MALAYSIAN FORUM

Melbournian : A very lengthy analysis that echos familiar cliche from "soft-landers". My only comment is that there are two important factors that seems to be absent from his presentation: ie the component of human emotion and the lack of accountability in the derivative instruments that are prevalent in recent years. The health of credit market depends un-surprisingly on market "credibility". Quite akin to the railroad stock bubble and the (in)famous tulip futures fiascos in the past , the total sum of global derivatives todays seems to have exceeded the true intrinsic values of the actual goods and services that these instruments are supposed to underpin. Laws of conservation and Newton's principle of inertia are no longer relevant. No longer can one confidently say for sure that one man's gains equal in exactitude to another's losses. Containment ? Lets hope and pray.

Nik Zafri :

Hi Melbournian, I must say that I'm impressed!

This research seem to miss out "CCI" (Consumer Confidence Index) which I think suitably describes what you meant by 'human emotion' in the context of economics. (it's obvious isn't it....the article is touching on 'purchasing power', 'manpower', business surroundings - which are all linked to the CCI)

Surprisingly I have also discovered that the Global CCI have always been missing (in fact seldom being measured) But; in US; it will suddenly 'appear' during proposal to hike interest rates by the Feds - hence one of the main indicators to the performance of the stock market worldwide.

I can understand why the CCI is sometimes there and sometimes not there...it's because of the big variance between one country to another. CCI is suppose to be the consumption indicator for GDP.

Lack of accountability on derivative instruments

What you have said - coincidentally reminding me of the core of Management - it is said that :

"Responsibility is a derivative of authority and accountability is a derivative of responsibility"

It's a paradox - I do not know if there is any connection.

Anyway, in this case, the derivative instrument (to the accounting standards esp. balance sheet) becomes a concern when it involve hedging and embedded derivatives (contract) - to determine of whether they (derivatives) are liabilities or asset. Otherwise positioning of finance and determining the derivatives value cannot be accurately achieved.

I'm not a qualified accountant but I do know the affects of hedging either the normal fair value, cashflow or currency. Now? As you said and I would to agree to it that most accounting (and auditing) bodies (even in Malaysia) are 'shouting' demanding accountability but again, it is easier said than done unless further education to include hedging activities and the volatility behind them in the context of derivatives are developed further.

Yes, breaking every rule in the book is now trendy!! It is also the reason why I am really interested in the concept of Knowledge-Based Economy and Knowledge Management but of course these two terms are moulded according to my style of intepretation - in short my experience. At times, I never trust figures, data and statistics but I use my instincts to make decisions.

Finally quoting you : "Let's Pray and Hope"

This is one of the 'wake-up' call article.

--------------------------------------------------------
The Sun Makin Sens Section - by Tan Siok Choo

East Asia - no longer a follower?

THAT the US appears to be sliding into a recession cannot be denied. What is uncertain is whether East Asia in general, and Malaysia in particular, can avoid following in its wake. While it may be premature to offer a definitive answer to this question, three separate indicators underscore export-dependent East Asia’s growing resilience.

First, a recent article by Bloomberg suggests Japan may escape the recession that appears to be engulfing the US. As one of the world’s largest financial news and data provider notes, since 1970, Japan has followed the US into all five recessions. In 1970, the US accounted for 30% of Japan’s exports. Today, that figure has fallen to only 20%.

Japan’s reduced economic dependence on the US is largely due to the success of manufacturing companies like Toyota in capitalising on buoyant markets, particularly in China and other countries. In the past two years, Japan’s exports to China jumped by 45% while those to Russia doubled.

Additionally, a 5.6% drop in US vehicle sales didn’t stop Toyota’s total unit sales from rising in the first quarter. Furthermore, Toyota is poised to overtake the US-based General Motors as the world’s largest auto company in terms of sales.

Last month, two usually bearish brokers on Japan – Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley – backed off from predictions that the world’s second largest economy will go into a recession this year. The catalyst for both brokers’ changed view was because revised industrial production figures for February showed output rose to a record rather than fell, the Bloomberg article says.

Even though exports could slow down, corporate Japan is now financially stronger than when its stock and property bubble burst in the late 1980s. The average ratio of corporate liabilities to assets has dropped to about 65%, the lowest level since 1955 from about 80% in the mid-1990s, the Merrill Lynch report says.

Moreover, Japanese companies have soaked up excess production capacity. Reduced debt and streamlined production will enhance corporate Japan’s capability to withstand a slump in the US, Bloomberg notes.

Second, the price of oil has continued its inexorable climb to a record high, even though its biggest market appears to be softening. Last in electronic trading last Friday, US crude futures for June delivery hit an intra-day record of US$126.20 (RM403.84) a barrel.

Admittedly, the escalating price of oil this year may be prompted by concern about possible disruptions in continued supply in countries like Nigeria and Venezuela. That prices continue to skyrocket despite sharply declining demand from the US, the world’s largest consumer of oil, is unusual. In February this year, US demand for oil fell to 19.7 million barrels of oil a day, down by one million barrels from last year’s average.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) says oil use worldwide will increase 2% this year because of growing demand in emerging markets. For the first time this year, emerging markets will consume more crude oil than the US, the IEA notes. Emerging markets will consume 20.67 million barrels of oil a day, an increase of 4.4%. In contrast, demand in the US will contract by 2% to 20.38 million barrels daily.

"The US recession will be a footnote as far as the oil market is concerned. Supply isn’t growing and demand is growing robustly in the developing world," says Jeffrey Rubin, chief economist at CIBC World Markets in Toronto who has correctly forecast higher oil prices since 2000.

Third, shipments of personal computers (PC) grew at a double-digit pace worldwide in the first quarter despite anaemic growth in the US, technology research firm, IDC says. Indeed, global figures for the first quarter exceeded its forecast.

Although growth in US sales slowed to around 3%, overseas gains boosted global first quarter PC shipments 14.6%, IDC notes. That’s because the US accounted for 23% of global shipments in the first quarter compared with 25% a year ago.

"Even if there is a particularly bad US market, it is becoming a smaller piece of the global puzzle," IDC vice-president Bob O’Donnell points out.

Despite these positive indicators, East Asia’s growing resilience cannot be equated with total independence from the US economy.

For a start, if the US economy is in recession, it may take months before the impact is transmitted to East Asia. Additionally, in an increasingly interlinked global economy – particularly in financial markets – it is inconceivable that what happens in the US can be ring-fenced from other emerging economies.

But if the inconceivable does happen – if the US sinks into recession and if East Asia succeeds in decoupling from the world’s largest economy – then a new era in global economic history may have begun.