Categories
Economics

[1332] Of is this privatization or nationalization?

With the proliferation of government intervention in the market nowadays, the terms privatization and nationalization can be confusing. For instance, PNB which has expressed its interest to take MIDF private:

PETALING JAYA: Pemodalan Nasional Bhd (PNB) has proposed to take private Malaysian Industrial Development Finance Bhd (MIDF) by buying the remaining 79.98% shares it does not own for RM1.90 each. [PNB offers RM1.90 to take MIDF private. The Star. August 14 2007]

Take private?

PNB is no private equity entity. Instead, PNB is an investment firm ultimately wholly-owned by the government of Malaysia through Yayasan Pelaburan Bumiputra. Wouldn’t that mean this exercise would actually nationalize MIDF?

Categories
Economics

[1327] Of that rubbish that is technical analysis

When I first got back to Malaysia, I had a few job offers and one of them was with a small Japanese broking house in Kuala Lumpur. When I thought of broking house, I told myself, finally, a chance to put all those silly call and put options calculation into practice. Instead, I discovered what nonsense chartist brokers speak in; the way they work is so repulsive and that became one of few jobs that I am glad that I gave a solid no.

I always find it surprising how elaborate technical analysts or chartists go to extrapolate past prices into the future without any regard to fundamentals of companies. What is more shocking is the number of people in the public that believe in sophisticated senseless rationale and jargons used by chartists to predict future prices. Just open the business section of any local mainstream newspaper and observe how many chartists speaking bullshit there. But then again, these newspapers take feng shui seriously…

I have a real issue with individuals that try to forecast the economy through feng shui but I am going off tangent.

Anyway, how senseless is technical analysis?

Two of the common jargons used by chartists are support and resistance lines. Chartists believe — I stress: believe. You know, like tooth fairy godmother kind of thing — that these are the lines which prices find it hard to cross. But how do they derive these lines?

They basically choose a time frame at their wimp and then draw a line that corresponds to a couple of local minimums, or maximums, depending whether one is referring to support or resistance. After drawing the lines, chartists pretend that prices would have a hard time crossing the lines. If prices do go over these lines, chartists would find new lines based on past prices and say the same thing all over again. The problem with this is that these lines almost never able to help in making reliable forecasts.

In fact, these lines are so ridiculous that anybody could draw it. You do not need a broker to draw a freaking straight line for you. Go ahead, try it yourself. You can do it.

Another term, which I hate so much is correction. What the do they mean by correction? Do they mean somebody made a mistake in recording of prices? The only correction to be made is to their support and resistance lines, which by the way, are never right in the first place. Prices reflect the available information at a particular point of time. If information changes, so would the prices.

As if these support and resistance lines are reliable to forecast prices, chartists have the cheeks to even forecast their forecast! They call such forecast of forecast as pivot point calculation. I call it bullshit.

I do admit that superficial forecasting like this may hit the bull eyes from time to time. However, it is so only when enough people actually believe in that rubbish; very much self-fulfilling prophecies. Or mostly, it is just coincidence. At least one third of the time, a chart could get it right because of pure probability, not due to piercing insight.

In actual fact, prices depend on firms’ fundamental information like growth expectation and ability of management, not past market prices. Past market prices only reflect past information and do not incorporate relevant new information. That is why forecasting future prices cannot be done by reading past prices. If chartists are so good, tell me, how many chartists predicted the fall of Transmile from RM14 to merely RM4?

Oh, oh. Please do not tell me the support line right now is somewhere above RM4. And please, do not compare technical analysis with econometrics. Most of these chartists do not have an idea what time-series analysis is.

I will say this and I will say this only once: technical analysis or whatever you would like to call it is not economics.

Categories
Economics

[1325] Of the FOMC sits today

Though reports have speculated that the Fed will leave the rate at 5.25%, recent jitters might convince the Fed to slightly trim the rate.

The FOMC sits today. So, brace yourself.

For me personally, the last few weeks have been miserable. What was a 20% returns portfolio now gives only nearly 1%. Sigh…

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

p/s — the rate stays:

US interest rates have been kept on hold, despite mounting fears about the state of the economy.

Analysts had widely predicted the US Federal Reserve would leave rates at 5.25% for a 13th month, and that was the unanimous verdict of the Fed panel. [US interest rates left unchanged. BBC News. August 7 2007]

Categories
Economics Politics & government Society

[1324] Of a grim signal for the opposition and possibly a bad survey

In both Turkey and Japan, voters’ main concern is the same: the health of the economy.

The Merdeka Centre for Opinion Research conducted a survey earlier in June and this is the result:

A survey by the Merdeka Centre for Opinion Research in June found that 76 per cent of Malays thought the economy was favourable, but only 45 per cent of Chinese and 58 per cent of Indians shared their view. [News Focus: Economy, crime main concerns of Malaysians. Darshni, Shamini. NST. August 7 2007]

That does not sound good for any opposition party that depends on Malay votes.

Regardless, this might be a result of a very confusing question:

Asked whether they thought Malaysia was lagging other economies but if programmes and other government efforts would help the country catch up, 24 per cent of Malays, 44 per cent of Chinese and 45 per cent of Indians disagreed. [News Focus: Economy, crime main concerns of Malaysians. Darshni, Shamini. NST. August 7 2007]

Do the participants disagree to the statement “the economy is lagging” or “government effort helps to catch up”?

And these results do not make sense, or at least something is missing.

On Islamisation, 91 per cent of Malays said they supported the idea while 82 per cent of Chinese and 58 per cent of Indians did not. [News Focus: Economy, crime main concerns of Malaysians. Darshni, Shamini. NST. August 7 2007]

Do read that together with:

Among those who felt the Islamisation process had a positive effect, 29 per cent said it instilled noble values and eight per cent said the religion helped reduce social ills and indecency. [News Focus: Economy, crime main concerns of Malaysians. Darshni, Shamini. NST. August 7 2007]

Only 29% of the sample agrees that Islamization instill noble values and only 8% agrees that religion reduces social ills but 91% of Malays support Islamization. Odd.

I believe a more meaningful way of presenting the results is to either divide the result regarding instillation of noble values into ethnic groups, or to have the percentage out of the total sample related to the question of support for Islamization instead of having it in its current form. Only through either one method does one could compare an apple to an apple. By reading this article from the New Straits Times, it is either the reporter has bad critical writing skill or the Merdeka Centre conducts unreliable survey.

I tried to clarify some of my confusion by looking for the actual survey. The Merdeka Centre’s site however is disappointing: nothing relevant could be found there.

But putting technical questions aside, could it be that the reason behind support for Islamization is neither about promoting noble values nor reducing social ills but mostly caused by something else?

And finally:

On Islamisation, 91 per cent of Malays said they supported the idea while 82 per cent of Chinese and 58 per cent of Indians did not. [News Focus: Economy, crime main concerns of Malaysians. Darshni, Shamini. NST. August 7 2007]

A concrete fact to support my earlier post.

Categories
Economics Politics & government

[1322] Of lesson from Japan

The recent Turkish election, which saw the conservative AKP gaining control of the Turkish legislature with a strong majority, taught the world the importance of a healthy economy. The recent Japanese upper house election unmistakably rings the same bell:

The vote was a rejection of Mr Abe’s priorities, which emphasise ideological issues of nationhood, such as instilling patriotic education, rewriting the pacifist constitution and expanding the role of the Japanese armed forces. Many Japanese are not opposed to such measures, but they rate them far below pocketbook concerns: a shortage of decent jobs for the young; stagnant wages; rising health-care costs; uncertain pensions; and swathes of the depopulated countryside missing out on the economic recovery that has taken hold in Tokyo and other big cities. Mr Abe’s blunder, contend Richard Katz and Peter Ennis from the Oriental Economist, a newsletter, was to think that the recovery would take care of these concerns by itself. [Keeping his head just above water. The Economist. August 2 2007]

What lesson do you think the upcoming Malaysian election will teach us?

Parties like DAP and PKR better memorize this lesson to heart before it is too late.