Have You Met Her

Friends have been complaining that I don't post much nowadays. Tired la after 9 years on the net. Don't feel like talking about stocks cause you get no credit and just get whacked whether a stock goes up or down - up (oh he works with syndicates), down (he is useless). Of course I can take the high road and say I couldn't care what haters say, but at the end of it, why do it at all. Might as well keep quiet. 












I do not allow adverts so I don't get paid a cent no matter how you cut it. Plus certain authorities do monitor what you post (on stocks) and its not to give me a prize if you know what I mean. So its not worth it.



Then my friends say that I should at least go back and do postings which got my blog popular in the first place - i.e. good selection of pretty Asian girls' photos. So here's Sabina Altynbekova. I know we would all be volleyball fans if we can just watch her play for Khazakstan. She is 20 this year and stands at 6 foot.

Ola Bola ... Talking Points

I watched it the first day it came out. How much was hype? I will say more later. Social media is abuzz with talking points. I was there, though very very young... so I can relate a bit better. My views in blue.

Below were excerpts of online comments:

> “It should be Eric Yong (James Wong,) the pride of Sabah, to score the historical goal, never understand why Ali is the scorer.... Why change the proud history of Malaysian football.... a very poor presentation of Malaysia football history...OlaBola....u can never cheat history.

Strictly speaking, IT IS NOT A DOCUMENTARY ... why don't you hit out on how good looking Keong was, supposedly to be Soh Chin Aun (tauke), I respect Chin Aun a lot as possibly the best defender Malaysia has ever produced but he is no looker. BUT if its not a documentary, it was BASED on real life events... it was, and they actually went as far as going to Sabah taking the train to talk to a supposedly ex-Sabah national player ... so obviously Eric in the movie was James Wong's "character somewhat" .. I know its not supposed to be accurate but you go all the way to try and replicate the FEELING OF MUHIBBAH, the Malaysia Boleh spirit, the fight for nation spirit ... why tamper with the scores and the scorer??? If it does not matter, why tamper??? Obviously its to make a deliberate attempt to balance out the racial focus of the movie - the tauke had a large portion of it, followed by Muthu's (Arumugam) family ... and in trying not to leave out the Malays, ...Ali became the scorer?? When do we have to be politically correct in creative arts, I guess thats why its called creative. I supposed the film maker would have wanted to stay true BUT look at the humungous number of advertisers and sponsors behind the film - I am sure THEY HAD A FUCKED UP say in it. The director/writer gets the brunt of it but somehow I think its NOT HIS FAULT. 

> Don’t waste your money and time to watch the movie, OlaBola! I was going to watch it few days ago in KL due to rave reviews but my bro-in-law and friends confirmed that not Eric but Ali who scored.

Again, to boycott the movie because of that one fact is just silly. It is not a historical documentary, in as much as Titanic was based on real events but you know there was no fucking Jack shouting "I am KING OF THE WORLD" in reality. But most of us enjoyed it. I can see the stupidity in having Ali scoring the goal - the biggest discredit is to have a whole new generation NOT knowing that it was James Wong who scored. But thanks to the uproar in social media - like it or not, now EVERYBODY KNOWS King James Wong scored the fucking goal!!! 

Imagine a film based on real events about Malaysia's independence, BUT NOT A DOCUMENTARY and you have Sinnapiah Samy shouting "Merdeka, Merdeka, Merdeka"...  at the stadium - you can do that but people will cringe at how far you went beyond real life events. 

Its a reprehensible fault but not big enough to detract from the overall good movie and execution.

> The younger n future generations MUST know the TRUE facts of Malaysia football.

> All of us here have a very strong feeling about being a Sabahan and the way we have been treated by our West Malaysian counterparts.

OK, don't be overly sensitive my beloved East Malaysians. The film actually shot a lot of scenes in Sabah, its beautiful. We get too sensitive about that ONE THING that distracts from the overall. Yes, I believe East Malaysians have been "mis-treated" in many ways. Look at Malaysia Day, when did it actually became a holiday? But we are still a young country and these things evolve and we learn. Our parents who live in West Malaysia rarely got the chance to visit East Malaysia during their heydays - but I think it would be fair to assume the majority of us below 40 have done so nowadays. Some things are NOT TAUGHT at school, we learn as we go along. Of course its largely the government's fault.

> The movie is not a documentary or biography. Names and storyline can be changed and also altered for the big screen. The movie’s main theme is about the true spirit of 1Malaysia. That’s the main message of the movie if we look at it from bigger picture.

Overall, the movie is a 7/10 ... not a 9 or a 10. The storyline is mushy and predictable. The acting was pretty good though I must say. The best thing about the film, the cinematography, the lensing and framing of scenic shots were superb. Who knew Malaysia was so pretty. The other good thing was how the team stayed true to the 70s in terms of the dressing, artefacts, ... the 70s fun-fair was exactly the way it was. Plus the theme song was fantastic.

I wondered why didn't the team stick to the truth and obtain permission from players to get at as close to the truth in the movie. 

Another thing is that the movie will gross a lot of money, as of last week its passing RM12m, a lot for a local film. BUT look at the power of advertising and commercials. Can someone tabulate how much would it cost to have that many advertisements on Astro??? Maybe RM12m also. I can safely say, without the powerful sponsors, Ola Bola would just be a middling success in box office locally. I am sure there are many struggling local film makers who would have balked and vomitted at the incessant deluge of commercials and song plays on Ola Bola. Imagine the brilliant local movie JAGAT, who only had a few days at the local cinemas before being pulled - how they could do with just 1/10th of the commercials Ola Bola had. Fair/Unfair ... pls vote now!!!

While it is all good to remember the team that got the second Olympic qualification, I am quite sure that they HAD ALL THEIR AMBITIONS, TENACITY and INSPIRATION from the earlier team who ACTUALLY got to go to the Olympics. The 1970s team ... did not get their deserved accolades as well. In fact the 80s team, I am sure would say their heroes were the following 1970s superstars (I may have left out a few):

SYED AHMAD

WONG CHOON WAH

ALI BAKAR

ISA BAKAR

SALLEH IBRAHIM

M CHANDRAN

MOKHTAR DAHARI
LIM FUNG KEE

SHAHARUDDIN ABDULLAH

M BAKAR

HARUN JUSOH

UMAPARAN

REDUAN ABDULLAH
WONG KOU FOU

BAKRI IBNI

SHUKOR SALLEH

These are the players that paved the way... that allowed the younger Malaysians to dream of the possible.

Life is not fair. As corporations with a heart, as a government who may start to have a heart ... do what is right, support good efforts fairly, as equitably as you can. Political correctness has no place in a true blue Malaysia.

The "Kong Luoi" Debate

This phenomena not only dominates HK social scene but seems to be just as pervasive in Malaysia and Singapore.

A few years back,  there have been a huge backlash and debate on the Internet and even mainstream media on the unacceptable attitudes of some HK girls. Girls who fit the description are called "Kong Luoi" (short for HK girls but with a derogatory sideswipe at them). Its a generalisation and not all girls will have all the attributes, but you will recognise them immediately.

"Kong Luoi" (KLs) phenomenon was started as the 63.8 incident. What started as a first date went horribly wrong when the couple went into a store, and the girl bought some stuff and it came to HK$63.80. The girl expected the guy to pay but he did not and she ended up paying HK$63.80. That was not the end of it. The girl recorded a video and uploaded it on You Tube ranting and bitching what an asshole and cheap the guy was for not offering to pay HK$63.80. Her berating video pissed a lot of guys off and started the HK guys compiling things that they find unattractive in certain HK girls.

Some of the common traits:
1) "ying fun" - girls who think that they are doing guys a favour by allowing the guys to date them, hence the guys should appreciate the opportunity, thus do not expect them to go dutch or pay for anything during the date. "ying fun" = deserved to be treated well. Did you know that the trend is for girls to never even bringing their wallets with them when they go on dates.

2) "ying koi" - girls who think that it is manners and politeness for the guys to foot everything on a date just because they are girls. Very close in meaning to "ying fun" but has an element of "should have" - i.e. guys should do those things without having the need to be even discussed.

3) "tiu tik" the girls are great critics on what the guys have, what he does not have, how he carries himself, whether he is a good conversationalist, not good looking enough if they don't like anywhere close to Andy Lau, making a summation of his prospects as a future boyfriend and provider by just looking at appearance, making a minor thing into a big character flaw, etc... thus relegating all guys as also-rans.

4) "hau but thoui sum" what she says never ties in with what she really wants. Ask her what she wants to have for dinner, she will say "Mow sor wai, see tharn le" (I don't mind, anything will do), but when you suggest Japanese, she will say too much raw stuff, you suggest Indian, she will claim its too spicy, you suggest Cantonese, she will say its too oily.. and still say "kei sart, ngor mow sor wai ke, mutt yeah thou tak" (Actually, I am quite easy, whatever is OK)... you suggests steamboat, she will say it is heaty and make her have pimples ... naturally for these kind of girls, I will tell them, "lei sick chee kei le" (Go eat yourself bitch!).

5) control - she always want to be in control of the relationship, once you move from dating to a steady relationship, one of the first question she will ask is if you would mind to give her all your pay for her to manage the finances when they get married. I think its only ok in Korea and Japan, but to even entertain such a question to me shows a complete wanting of control and to see how "far they can manipulate the guy to her liking". "Kong Luoi" justifies the line of questioning as that would allow them to see how much the guy sees them as a partnership and how much he trusts her. In my words, Bullshit Baby!!! Its a control issue.

6) KLs have a very strong penchant for branded goods and wouldn't want to be caught dead with last year's bags or shoes. They are never slim enough, even though guys keep telling them they are skinny enough. Its not enough for the guys to say so, its their fellow girlfriends that have to say that they are skinny enough, and baby, girlfriends will never ever say their fellow girlfriends are skinny enough. You are in a dead end cycle.

7) KLs are hard to court even though they do not come with great credentials. The usual 5Cs (car, cash, career, credit card, condo) as so basic that many girls would never ever consider going out with someone without at least 3Cs.

8) places too much importance on outward appearances. Ever wondered why there are so many slimming clinics in HK, and also skin whitening, tummy firming, breast firming, blemish reduction laser therapy, cellulite therapy, cosmetic plastic surgery to have double eyelids, botox... The girls will claim that a large part of why they are doing this is for the guys. Eeerrr, bullshit again, maybe so if the guy is very shallow, all these things to make up for outward inadequacies stem from a dire lack of self confidence and self belief, and that is one big character flaw in KLs. It has a lot to do with the culture and upbringing values instilled, either deliberately or unconsciously.

9) expect presents and celebrations with presents on these following days: her birthday, anniversary of the mundane kind, Christmas, Valentine's Day, some even chocolates during Easter, even New Year... and

In my view, its not just in HK but in many places as well. Its an equality issue whereby many females now can earn a good living and can dictate their own lives better. Before, girls grow up to be married off and thats that. However, with the desired equality status, in relationships, many still hang onto traditional roles of males and females. But the demands on those roles are so very different now. Everyone must come into a relationship knowing full well what each other's expectations are, if not they will never be met.

In HK, there is this quite silly phrase which sums up why girls in HK are generally very spoiled ("chung whai saei"). The phrase is "low pour hai lor farn lei sack" ( the reason to have a wife is to make sure she is well taken care of and loved). There does not seem to be much wrong with that phrase except when you think about it, its a passive thing for women, and it appears to be their divine right. My quibble is if I get married, am I marrying a loving partner or a passive piece of art for me to dust and vacuum and wipe. To take care as in taking up responsibility as a man of the house, yes, that I totally agree. Hope the nuances there is cleared up.

There is a limit to what is due care and concern by the guy, and what is absolutely reprehensible behaviour. Go to HK and you will see many guys carrying ladies purses and hand bags walking with their girlfriends on dates. I am ok, in fact I think its proper to carry the purses and hand bags if they have to go to toilets or have to go and try out some clothes when out shopping. But to have the guy carrying the stuff walking all over town, is demeaning. If a guy wants to carry a handbag, he should go and buy one himself. Its not a show of how much love and concern a guy shows the girl, its for the girl to show to everyone how much control she has of him. Why not make him wear a dress as well? Thats the crux, to the KLs, its always "if you love me, you will do it" mantra, always having to prove and reprove their affections.. "if you love me, you will buy it for me"... worse "if you love me, you will buy it for me without me having to tell you"... GAWD!!!

At the end, they morph into what I like to call "high maintenance" (HM) women. HM women are not just those who require a certain monetary sum to maintain their lifestyle. To me, HM women are HM because of how their minds torture you and in turn torture themselves. I will give you a classic HM woman, the wife will ask the husband just before they go to sleep "why did you give your 2nd uncle 3 boxes of mooncakes, but you gave my brother only 2 boxes"... that my friend, is HM!!!


p/s photos: Mandy Lieu & Elanne Kong

Bobo - For Magical Nights

There is a new place in town and its possibly the best new place to be. Judging from the concept and the people behind it, I believe this will be around for  a very long time as their concept is hitting all the right spots.

Its situated along the now famous Jalan Bangkung @ Bangsar. Strangely but fittingly, Bobo occupies the 1st and 2nd floors only. The small entry door next to Lucky Bo reminds you of possibly of an old jazz club back in the swinging 30s in New York.

The first floor is the dining area with a beautiful couch area, and another partially more intimate dining area separated by sheer curtains. The ambience is inviting, modern yet clean lines in design. Love the many art pieces, cleverly chosen to exude a visually pleasing environment.  








The Food

Modern European, nothing too complicated but most were pretty good. My favourite by a proverbial mile is the divine polenta truffle fries, light crunch on the outside, soft and creamy in the middle with truffles aroma lingering all over.

The prices are decent as well.

The 2nd Floor - Performance Hall

OK, NO SMOKING!!! Even though I smoke cigars, I think its very important and more conducive in an intimate performance arena to be totally smoke free. The ladies love it, I like it.

To go to the second floor, you have open a very heavy sound-proofing door. You won't hear a bleep of the performances when you are dining.

It opens to a snazzy tiny bar where people can mingle prior to the show starting, and its basically to serve drinks to patrons inside the hall.

There will only be performers from Tuesdays to Sundays. Only Fridays and Saturdays will feature special performers which you will usually have to pay a RM40-60pp cover charge (well worth it).

As for other days, you could just head along there, grab a drink and listen to the quite brilliant resident pianist, David Gomes.

When you dine there on Fridays and Saturdays, you get the privilege of booking a "reserved table" for performances at discounted rates.

Knowing that they are catering to the 30-70 crowds and being in a suburb, the performances usually start at 9.30pm sharp and the second set will end way before midnight thus allowing all to get home earlier.



The Acoustics

Designed by a expert, the sound proofing and acoustics are fantastic. It creates warm notes and resonating tones. The open-thatched roof is a sight to behold.


















Performers

The invited performances are curated by the ever popular, our own Broadway star, Malaysia's Buble ... Sean Ghazi - who will somehow jump onto the stage every now and then to surprise audiences.


Things To Improve

Double your wine selections, more good single malts and a more extensive "gastrobar" please.



Conclusion

Good food, great music or comedy, in a classy setting ... what a magical night out!!!

On the left is the balcony on first floor for smokers to take a break, its very very nice ... and when its raining outside, I can think of no better place to be than here smoking a cigar and getting a G&T, it really is quiet, just watching the world drifts by. On the right is the amazing polenta truffle fries.

Bowie - Not Of This World, Has Left Earth

I am glad I did a tribute to David Bowie back last September. His demise was sudden as his fight with cancer was kept well hidden from the media. Sad. 

http://malaysiafinance.blogspot.my/2015/09/bowie-deserves-more-accolades.html?m=1

The Big Short ***** (5 Stars)

Just saw the movie. If you are in the investment industry for the past 10-30 years, it's flicking brilliant. As good as the book by my fav writer. Which is why I only have time to read nonfiction... If you are not, this might be a hit n miss. Danger being lost with the terminologies but they have tried very hard to explain everything. 

The director did a smart thing by getting a few "guests" as themselves explaining various investing concepts and terminologies to movie goers - that was a hoot. Especially with Margo Robbie in bath explaining investing terminologies ... then we had Anthony Bourdain and even Selena Gomez.

The Big Short will be a frontrunner for Oscars ... the overwhelming stupidity, criminality, conspiracy and institutionalised depravity of the financial system will ensure that this movie will At Least get nominated as Best Picture this year. The Academy likes to give out honours to very old people or to make a statement ...The Big Short falls under the latter category. The voting members are filled with liberal minded, mainly Democrats or socialistic leaning members.

Even I am very mad with the debacle, we can see the carnage, the devastation ... and we have more than sufficient information on who the culprits were ... and at the end of the day, ONE person goes to jail.

I will take the odds n bet that it stands a great chance. Btw Christian Bale and Steve Carrell were awesome, but Bale has his nose in front for Best Actor. ***** 5 stars.

In many ways The Big Short being a reality tale, is but a reflection or copy of the same shit in politics. The great thing about financial crisis is that we get a lot more transparency and a lot more information from reams of data and opinions from experts. Something we do not always get from the dastard "industry" that is politics. A place where almost everyone has an agenda that is selfish and egotistical, and lies and empty promises or silly sales speeches dominate the vernacular. Whenever shit hits the fan, there will be the blame game, everyone on a first out best dressed ... the mocking of the truth and what is truth... the belittling of goodness of the human spirit.

I think we need to study the book, the movie a lot more because we can learn more on how to behave better as human, and a lot better as investors. There is always repercussions to gains and losses, its not just the money, investing in assets or losing always has a real effect on lives, whether you are winning or losing. So, if you are on the right side, you may not be totally "right". Making money is good, we cannot distill all the repercussions or collateral damage on the losing side ... which is why we should do our best to give back, to balance the scales of justice where we can.

Before you go to watch the movie, you may like to re-read a blog posting (cum printed article) back in June 2008 - it was my take on who should be blamed for the subprime crisis. Pretty accurate methinks.

Back in JUNE 2008, I wrote an assessment of the blame game for the sub prime crisis. It was also published in StarBiz when I had my weekly column Investing Scents. Looking back, it was a very good assessment and I still stick by it. In fact, Michael Lewis' book just confirms most of what I opined back then.

The Bald, The Beard & The Ugly

I was watching the uncomfortable grilling by the US lawmakers on Bernanke and Paulson. I pity those two guys. They are trying to fix a problem which was inherited but had to suffer the embarrassment of trying to persuade them to approve the funds. We all must be wondering who actually are the culprits that brought about such a calamity. I shall try to ascribe blame to the relevant parties. Its a highly subjective exercise, and everyone will have a different opinion, but that's ok. Here's my two cents worth (and rapidly diminishing two cents in value): 

30% Management of Investment Banks & Mortgage Lenders - They were greedy. They had thrown risk management out the window. They were overpaid for the work they do. When the going is good, they all pocket more than their share of the chips on the table. The worst punishment they got was to walk out the door with nary an apology. The vast amount of liquidity in the system and the thirst for mortgages prompted them to "invent" new fangled instruments to package these loans and resell them, with little regard to the leverage effect. Lenders kept pushing adjustable-rate and subprime mortgages, while investment banks bundled millions of risky loans and reselling them to investors. It was when these investment banks started to buy these same instruments themselves that really decimated their capital.

15% Alan Greenspan - He will continue to deny it was his doing, but since 2001 he advocated a lowering of interest rates and continued a strong money supply growth policy. That prompted the public to buy properties and even speculate in them. Greenspan was well known for lowering rates aggressively to counter any crisis – the query was that by doing that markets were never allowed to adequately correct the imbalances. This led to the credit explosion. Alan did see deterioration in the credit market back in 2003 and 2004 or was he blind, but didn't warn lenders off using the "non traditional mortgages" now seen as precursors of what is now a credit crisis until December of 2005, shortly before Greenspan resigned. The excessive liquidity in the system was not just by the Fed, in fact major central banks were guilty of pumping vast amount of money supply into the system. Back in 2004 Greenspan opposed tougher regulation of financial derivatives, and actually praised adjustable-rate mortgages and refinancing for homeowners. 

35% Ratings Agencies (S&P, Moody's, Fitch) - They are the unwitting culprits, and I am being nice here. They rated loans and bonds based on these mortgages AAA status, which caused many buyers to believe in their assurance that they were buying solid AAA papers. The ratings agencies again were too late to downgrade these papers, long after the damage is done. Its their stupid ratings and analysis which gave fuel to these instrument to be hawked to unsuspecting investors. Its their stupid ratings and analysis that gave the investment banks the bravery to keep piling up these instruments to the market. What kind of value added analysis are the issuers paying these rating agencies for?  Its obvious that the analysts knew much of the packaged loans consisted of subprime. Were the fees too enticing? Were the ratings agencies trying to curry favor with the banks? Maybe the analysts and managers were interested in going to work for the banks, where they can earn a lot more money. If these ratings agencies cannot do their jobs without fear or favour, how are investors to rely on these ratings anymore? Maybe the US should empower the government to rate bonds, especially if the government requires certain kinds of fund managers to own only officially-rated bonds.

15% The Regulators – The financial markets and the various instruments have their respective regulatory units. You may include the Fed, the CFTC, the SEC, FDIC, even the FASB into the fold. They are supposed to regulate and oversee the markets and the financial instruments. Where was the voice of reason? The last six years' housing and subprime mortgage bubble and bust had little to do with excessive government intervention. Instead they had all to do with the lack of any basic sensible government regulation of the mortgage market, regulation in practice rather than in theory. They should have instituted new guidelines and rules to govern these CDOs, credit default swaps, and the leverage aspect of financial firms and their capital at risk. Even till now, they are mainly silent. 

5% Paulson & Bernanke - They could have tried to reverse the damage in their early days as Treasury head and Fed chairman respectively, but they basically inherited a huge problem.

Now they talk about having to properly regulate derivatives and new instruments properly - sigh, there were institutions and people already appointed to do those jobs, its just that they did not do their jobs properly. I am still waiting for some of the above to be prosecuted for what they did and didn't do. At the end of it all, it appears that what some of them didn't do would be more punishable.

What about the American borrowers, the homeowners themselves should shoulder some of the blame, right? I left them out of the above equation for a few reasons: 

a) I do think there should be an element of "personal responsibility" for your actions, but it seems to me that they are already paying the cost for their foibles. Many had their homes foreclosed already. They have lost their deposits and the payments made towards these loans. It seems to me, they are THE ONLY group that has actually "really lost" materially and is already being punished for that. It is very hard not to be drawn into easy money, uptrending markets without need for deposits or proof of employment ... just join the party and the fees are shared gleefully all the way down.

b) The bailouts do not really bailout the end borrowers, they extend the life of the companies. Maybe the bailouts will allow the companies more time to foreclose these properties in an orderly manner. Very few of those will be able to renegotiate their existing loans on decent terms to allow them to continue to fund their mortgages. Most of the loans are priced at a time when property values are at least 30%-40% higher than now - better to declare bankruptcy than to continue to reconfigure the loan, isn't it? 

c) The public are not equipped to regulate themselves. That is why there are agencies created with "capable people" to regulate and monitor the markets. You cannot expect the majority of borrowers to understand in detail CDOs, credit default swaps, or whether the brokers are leveraging themselves to the hilt. You can only have assurance in relying on top ratings agencies branding certain papers as AAA. Which person is able to go and read the 500 page report and examine for themselves that these AAA bonds consist of thousands of small mortgages spread out over the country, how to value the price trends and affordability ratios of these borrowers?

d) The public will often act in herd like mentality. They are driven by greed just like most people. They see people making 50% in 2 years from speculating in properties, they want to be part of it. They try to apply for loans, and were probably even more shocked that these mortgage lenders were more than willing to lend to them. The markets are often characterised by bouts of insanity, if you stir them up with enough incentives and carrots, people will act irresponsibly. The regulating agencies are there to ensure for an orderly market and to quell excesses. The people cannot do it themselves. 

The ones who got out early will think they are very smart. The ones who got hit will think they were unfortunate victims. Both are wrong in their perception of their actions, financial decision making and brainpower. Both groups are closer to each other in every aspect than they would like to think. Its financial musical chairs, winners and losers depend on when the music stops, not whether you were smart.

In case you haven't figured the headline out: The Bald, The Beard & The Ugly – Paulson, Bernanke & Greenspan.

Star Wars vs Pahang

credit Yusri Amir