TR EMERITUS

Goh Choon Phong, a former SIA scholar, has helmed SIA since 2011. His performance is laughable, if not for the billions investors, including Temasek, have lost. Goh is no different from other former scholars who were parachuted into GLCs, eg, Ng Yat Chung, Desmond Kuek, etc. Already grossly overpaid for flying SIA nowhere in the face of real competition pre Covid-19, the recent record remuneration is a slap in the face for SIA shareholders. SIA CEO’s annual pay rises 88% to S$6.73 million (28 Jun) The reasons why CEO Goh is undeserving of his record multi-million dollar remuneration: 1. In FY2021, SIA had posted a record $4.3 billion net loss. Despite SIA’s worst year in history, Goh continued to receive his multi-million dollar remuneration. The following year when SIA incurred a loss of close to $1 bil and bailed out by taxpayers, Goh’s pay had increased to $3.5 mil. SIA still in the red for FY2022, but narrows loss to S$962m Since Goh did not suffer a drastic pay cut, why is he paid a record remuneration just as the company is recovering? 2. In FY2021, Goh was awarded SIA shares worth $1.65 mil with exercise prices ranging from $3.2 to $3.7. SIA share prices have more than doubled and Goh has already been rewarded for his ‘performance’. 3. Goh is just a mediocre CEO at best. At worst, go ask Tin Pei Ling. In the 6 years preceding Covid-19, SIA was really flying nowhere in the face of real competition. Revenue was stagnant, profit nothing to crow about. Click to enlarge 4. To SIA shareholders, Goh is a deadweight. But as with all scholars under the corrupt PAP system, they must appear to succeed at all costs. The ‘record profits’ headline for SIA, while impressive, should not have been used as the ‘metric’ for record bonuses payout to – especially – senior management executives like Goh. Selling economy-class tickets at higher than business-class prices during the pandemic is an act SIA is unlikely to repeat after other airlines get their act together. During his 12 years as CEO, Goh has been consistent in only one thing: delivering negative returns to shareholders, including Temasek. The SIA share price chart certainly doesn’t reflect the stellar performance of its overpaid CEO. We should stop kidding ourselves.   Phillip Ang   * The author blogs at likedatosocanmeh.      Read More →

Managed to get a young man who I’ve been trying to guide along his path replace me in a meeting. I’ve been overcome with this strange emotion of satisfaction that after the second week on the job, he’s actually being allowed to do things without me and more importantly, he’s going to develop the confidence to it. As I reflect on the emotions of this moment, I realise that a lot of significant moments in life come at a point of letting go of certain relationships so that they can develop. As parents, we need to let our kids go and become the adults that they were meant to be. As mentors, we need to let our mentees go and be their own people. If I look at my own experiences, one of the most significant moments in my life was from a conversation I had with my Dad, when I told him I volunteered for a live-firing exercise in the aftermath of exercise Swift Lion (here’s the MINDEF Press Release of that awful day - https://www.nas.gov.sg/archivesonline/data/pdfdoc/MINDEF_19970628001.pdf ). I told him that I was going and he said that he wasn’t happy about it (at the time, the possibility of coming home in a body bag remained very present). Then, he said “Talk about it with your mum. If you still want to go, I will support your decision no matter what happens.” This was the moment that I’ve felt closest to my dad as in he really showed me one of the most important aspects of being a parent – letting go. Dad has done many things for me. I’ve lived well and been educated at his expense. However, all the money he had spent on my schooling and was about to spend and all the luxuries I had enjoyed because of him didn’t mean as much to me as the fact that he was prepared to respect a decision of mine even if he was unhappy with it. Other significant moment came from letting go. In my professional life, the first instance came when my business partner at the time didn’t want to do the Polaris (now known as Intellect Design). He felt that there were too many risks involved because the deadlines were close. I chose to hang on and somehow despite everything I was telling the client about the very real chances of failure, the job proved to be a success and Polaris had a way of keeping me alive for a few years. Not only did I get work from them, but I made good friends and that opened the door to other parts of the Indian Expat community and to two of the three career highlights (the IIT and IIM Alumni events in 2012 and 2013). The other great career highlight came in 2006, when I was a freelancer pitching for the Saudi Embassy job with BANG PR, which was helmed by PN Balji, who had been for the better part of the time, the father of my profession of being a commentary writer and a PR consultant. It reached a stage, where Balji dropped out of the job and I became the only contractor. This was my opportunity to shine and by some fluke, me, with no real “experience” to speak of, managed a job traditionally reserved for government-to-government agencies. These experiences have made me understand that quite often, the people who limit us are not the people who dislike or even hate us. It’s the people who love us that harm us by not letting us grow. Think of parents who expect their grown children to report every detail of their life to them and still expect to have a say in what their adult children do. It also goes on in the professional world, where you have bosses who remind their employees that “If you didn’t work for me, you won’t survive.” This type of thinking is suffocating. It doesn’t allow for growth. A good parent will always want his or her kids to be able to survive without him or her. A good boss will ensure that the employees can survive without being employed by his or her organization. As Richard Branson argues, when you train your people so that they can leave, they won’t. Too many of us continue to struggle for relevance without realizing that we only become relevant to people when we allow them to be irrelevant in their lives.   Tang Li *Although I’ve been based mainly in Singapore for nearly two decades, I’ve had the privilege of being able to meet people who have crossed borders and cultures. I’ve befriended ministers and ambassadors and worked on projects involving a former head of state. Yet, at the same time, I’ve had the privilege of befriending migrant labourers and former convicts. All of them have a story to tell. All of them add to the fabric of life. I hope to express the stories that inspire us to create life as it should be.      Read More →

MAS made a staggering loss of S$30.8b in 22/23 due mainly to (a) S$21.4b translation loss of foreign assets which are primarily the foreign reserves, and (b) S$9b which is the carrying cost of the foreign reserves. There are those who understand it is the price MAS has to pay to stay the course to minimise the import of foreign inflation by pursing a monetary policy of non-inflationary growth. Those who do not appreciate this will never understand unless they invest a couple of hours learning monetary economics and MAS’s role in maintaining a stable price level. The purpose here is not to dwell on how the losses came about but rather on the bigger picture of where the S$25b to beef up MAS’s capital came from and whether past reserves were raided. The government injected additional capital of S$25b into MAS in March 2023. MAS is the government’s banker, so in the central bank’s book the transaction is straight forward – debit Government A/c, credit Share Capital A/c. As for the government, it has to make sure there are funds in their account. The Constitution defines ‘national reserves’ as the excess of assets over liabilities (ie equity) of the Government, statutory boards and 5th Schedule companies, of which MAS is one such. It defines ‘past reserves’ as reserves accumulated by the previous government. Current admin started in July 2020. The excess of assets over liabilities of MAS is represented by ‘Paid Up Capital’ and ‘General Reserves’. Thus for the current administration, the past reserves of MAS is basically S$44.88b. Apparently the losses of 21/22 (S$8.7b) and 22/23 (S$30.8b) caused past reserves to be raided as far as MAS is concerned. The President is the custodian of our past reserves. He/She exercises the power by withholding consent to any Supply Bill, Supplementary Supply Bill or Final Supply Bill – thereby blocking the Budget for the financial year, if past reserves are used. In other words, there is advance knowledge that the expenditure will cause a dip into past reserves. So it would seem MAS dipping into its past reserves in this manner (by simply clicking a keyboard to debit and credit the accounts) bypassed the mechanism of the second safety key of the President. Then again, the government’s defence will be that past reserves are not viewed at individual institution basis, but at national level. Singaporeans will again be locked out of any discussion by non-transparency. Where did the funds come from? Certainly not from operating revenue. Fiscal 2021/22 was overshot by S$4.2b after NIRC (net investment return contribution) from GIC and Temasek, and 2022/23 budget projected a deficit of S$3.6b after NIRC. There are 3 possibilities : a). Raise funds via issue of SG Treasury Bills. These are like bridge financing. Government uses this to raise funds when there is a time gap between receipt of operating revenue and expenditure. T Bills are very short term instruments. However, there is no evidence of such activity in March 2023. S$25b is a colossal sum and there would have been market talk at the time. b). Liquidate some of the securities MOF holds. These are liquid assets. But there are problems. S$25b is a massive sum. It is not easy to move them within a small window time frame without the market catching wind of it. These securities assets are also funds set aside for other intended purposes. c). Round robin trip part of the proceeds of the RGMS (reserves management government securities). These are foreign currencies so the funds are not at government's account with MAS but at various foreign agency banks. MOF sells foreign currency back to MAS for SGD which is credited to government’s SGD account with the central bank. MAS creates SGD25b to pay into the government's account. This is inflationary, but not if the funds are immediately used to credit Capital Account. But there are problems. First, the round robin tripping of RMGS proceeds is likely in contravention of the RMGS Act. Second, the RMGS were issued in 2022 Q1 – USD75b, Q2 – USD97.6b, Q3 – USD62.9b and Q4 – USD2.9b. All of these USD237.6b would have already been transferred to GIC. There was no RMGS issuance in 2023 Q1. However way the funds were put into the government's SGD account with MAS, it would not have appeared in any of the Spending Bills. That being so, the President has no way of knowing if past reserves have been utilised. Other than from past reserves, it's a head scratcher where the SGD25b could have come from. Singaporeans are better served if issues such as this are raised and clarified in Parliament, rather than on soap operas like Ridoutgate, unless of course one is meant to serve as distraction for the other.   Patrick Low * Article first appeared on Down The Rabbit Hole.      Read More →