[ad_1]
Assuming responsibility
IT goes without saying that with the Credit Suisse saga, comes many an investor who has been burnt badly.
Although there has not been an official figure, it is safe to assume that a number of investors who had bought the troubled Additional Tier 1 or AT1 bonds of Credit Suisse, are from Asia and even Malaysia.
Following the recent decision of Swiss regulators’ decision to write down the entire US$17bil (RM75bil) worth of Credit Suisse’s AT1 bonds – a story that dominated headlines in the past couple of weeks – other lenders will find it hard to issue such bonds, at least in the near future.
But that’s another story.
The crux of the issue is this. At least, to the investors who had invested in these bonds.
Were they ill-advised? Were they not informed? Who sold them these bonds?
As with all investments, there are risks.
But in most cases, especially when it comes to AT1 bonds, which supposedly come with better protection, no one expects an entire investment to be written down just like that.
In Malaysia, it is understood that these now worthless bonds were sold to high net wealth investors via relationship managers (RM) at some investment banks and asset management firms.
According to one investor who had purchased the bonds, the company, an asset management firm which sold them to him had even issued a “hold” call on the bonds, just a working day before it was publicly announced that they were written down to zero.
This investor had apparently even raised his concerns to the firm on the financial woes of Credit Suisse some time ago but was assured that there was no cause to be alarmed.
This brings us to the question of accountability. Should some accountability at least, fall on the company, bank or even on the RMs who sold the now defunct bonds to the then hopeful investors?
In these days of competitive banking, where RMs and other people who sell financial products are incentivised to sell more to meet key performance indicators and reach their own financial goals, there appears to be a lack of empathy but more importantly, knowledge when it comes to finance.
In this regard, banks and financial institutions should be more selective of who they hire.
Additionally, asset management firms, research houses and all who contribute to investment decisions being made by putting out stock or bond calls, should exercise more discretion and apply more knowledge when doing so. When investors get burnt in products like these, surely it is not entirely their fault?
Enhancing competition
CONSUMERS and entrepreneurs should be happy with what the current government is trying to do with regard to enhancing competition.
It was announced last week that Puspakom will no longer be the only agency providing vehicle inspection services from next year, when the company’s current concession comes to an end. While its concession will be renewed, it will no longer have a monopoly in the segment.
The government has also said that drivers would soon be able to pay highway tolls using other digital payment providers. This should spell more convenience to users while in the vehicle inspection case, new opportunities are there for businesses to venture into the vehicle inspection sector.
Aside from monopolistic behaviour, there are also other kinds of anti-competitive practices that need to be stopped.
One such area is parcel delivery services. As reported, Malaysia’s homegrown last mile companies have suffered the brunt of stiff competition from foreign owned entities who had dropped prices to gain market share.
Some popular eCommerce platform companies, also owned by foreign entities, have tended to “mask” out local delivery companies such as Pos Malaysia.
Malaysia has loose regulations that are allowing strong foreign players to nudge out local players. In many other countries, there are protective rules to protect their national carrier companies.
What is dangerous is to allow the last mile of delivery services to be controlled by foreign parties.
How difficult is it to implement such basic rules such as a floor price for parcel delivery and disallowing eCommerce platforms from preventing local delivery players from offering their services on those platforms.
Such new rules will go a long way in leveling the playing field and enable local players a fighting chance to survive in the business.
[ad_2]
Source link