Living life by finding fulfilment without landing in debt

ARE you driven by a desire for instant gratification? Today, it has become a norm to splash the cash on ourselves, and it seems to be getting harder to keep in check the urge to spend and spend.

Unfortunately, current gain may mean future pain unless we are in control of our expenses. The good news is that it is possible to stay in charge if we know how to change our behaviour and what tools we need to do the job.

Falling prey

When the latest gadget or fad is in town, our lives seem to turn unbearably dull until we go out and get a piece of the action for ourselves.

We see others enjoying their iPads or Galaxy Note, and feel so left behind because we don’t have one ourselves. A few months ago, we had barely spared a thought on it, but for some strange reason, it suddenly feels like we just cannot function without having one. So, before we can check ourselves, we’ve gone and bought one too, although we may not really know what we want to use it for, except endlessly checking our Facebook accounts.

That is just one among the many temptations around us that are competing for our hard-earned money. Media messages of dream getaways fuel our desire to go to enchanting overseas locations, and we can’t wait to blow a small fortune on a holiday it has to be next month or we could almost burst.

Advertisements sell us the idea that we deserve to live a privileged existence, no matter what our station in life. We indulge in fine dining at the drop of a hat. When the stress of our jobs gets to us, shopping comes to the rescue in the name of retail therapy.

No wonder we find that there’s a big hole in our pockets. For those of us who have become used to living life large, it may seem strange that not long ago, that was far from the norm. Just one generation earlier, it was quite usual for people to save patiently towards their financial goals, i.e. to delay gratification until they had the money to spend.

Before and now

If they wanted to buy a car, our folks would not simply look for the latest model, but consider what was on the second-hand market. They would save towards a bigger downpayment, to reduce the interest they have to pay on the hire-purchase loan.

The first step was to save, not seek enjoyment. They kept money aside for education and important financial goals. The habit of accumulating savings was strongly ingrained in them. Sadly, that is virtually non-existent now. If you found yourself in a deep level of debt, this is a habit you have to re-learn in order to regain control of your finances.

For sound money management, delayed gratification is a key behaviour to adopt, while instant gratification can set us on the road to serious financial problems. Worse yet is “advance gratification”, when we spend money before we have earned it. Seeking instant enjoyment is not as bad. It just means that we cannot keep cash and spend it as soon as we have it in our hands.

Today, with the massive use of credit cards to pay for high lifestyles, we are in danger of being buried under consumer debt. This is a growing problem which is being seen particularly among the young.

In the past, a person who had no savings was seen as someone with poor money management skills. Now, it is quite common for people in their 20s and 30s to already be in debt to the tune of RM30,000 to RM50,000. Addressing this problem requires a change in mindsets.

Not so long ago, a person entering the job market would use the bus or get a second-hand motorcycle for about RM2,000 to RM3,000. Purchasing a car would be delayed until after about five years of work. Even then, it would probably be a used car costing between RM10,000 and RM12,000.

Today, many young people expect to drive a car before they work, usually looking to their parents for financing. For better money management, this expectation should be replaced by the habit of delayed gratification. If the young learn to save towards the car they want to drive, they can avoid building up a heavy burden of debt. Taking the LRT or commuter train can be among the options.

Growing materialism

The easy availability of consumer credit can contribute to debt accumulation becoming a larger problem for the economy, as is seen in debt-driven societies like the United States and some European countries. The Malaysian authorities can avoid the mistakes of those countries by taking further action to tighten lending rules.

Personal debt management problems are closely related to another trend in society today growing materialism. The idea that happiness depends on the number of material possessions we have appears to be stronger as time goes by.

More than ever, we now need to rediscover the value of non-material interests such as watching the sunset, jungle trekking or volunteering our time in order to find happiness and fulfilment in our lives. We need to find a balance between material wealth and life-enriching experiences that are not measured in monetary terms but build our self-esteem.

For most of us, the amount of money available is limited. In fact, there is never enough for anyone. If we change the way we look at ourselves, many of the problems associated with excessive spending will be resolved.

Instead of dining out at a fancy restaurant, we can have a fulfilling meal at home with our families and enjoy the warmth of their happiness. Instead of spending on more clothes, we can save the money for a good end. Instead of splurging on an expensive holiday, we can find joy and accomplishment in playing a musical instrument.

These are values that adults can inculcate in the young that will pay dividends all their lives. Perhaps the current debt crisis is a reminder to pay attention to the lifestyle choices we unwittingly teach the young.

MONEY & YOU By YAP MING HUI -Yap Ming Hui (yapmh@whitman.com.my) is an independent financial advisor. He is the managing director of Whitman Independent Advisors

Related post:

Personal finance: what rich Asian women want for their money?

Malaysian banks tighten the screening of loans

THE local property sector is expected to see some “cooling down” in the number of transactions this year following the implementation of the responsible lending guidelines by Bank Negara on Jan 1.

According to Real Estate and Housing Developers Association (Rehda) president Datuk Seri Michael Yam, transactions are now taking a longer time to crystallise as banks are grappling with more data required for processing loan applications.

Yam says transactions are taking a longer time to crystallise.

“Buyers are also not committing to purchases until they get clearance from banks that they will be offered the loan applied for, which may or may not be sufficient for them to purchase the property they desire.

“The first segment to be affected is obviously the residential component. For the non-residential, especially commercial properties which may be bought by companies or partnerships, we understand the new formula is not applicable,” he tells StarBizWeek.

Yam feels that the new ruling will have a huge impact on the middle-income segment.

“However, it is common for this group to actually have double (or even) triple incomes from their second and third jobs, but may not have documents to support higher loan eligibility. While prudent risk management is good, financial institutions must also play a facilitative role in the home ownership agenda by assessing each application on its own merit and not blanket applications across the board.”

He adds that the affordable housing segment will probably be the most affected segment as borrowers are likely to be less affluent, with lower income and disproportionately higher expenditure.

“We predict headwinds for sales in this critical segment, which is contradictory to the wish of the Government to encourage home ownership,” Yam says.

Chang says the entry level market will be the most affected.

In light of this situation, Federation of Malaysian Consumers Association (Fomca) chief executive officer Datuk Paul Selvaraj is urging the central bank to perhaps ease the loan application process, such as making it easier for consumers to switch banks if necessary.

“Consumers, if they feel that they can get a better deal with another bank for their housing or car loan, should be able to do so with ease and at minimum costs. Consumers often feel overwhelmed at the procedures for changing banks. The process should be simplified. The ease of bank switching would promote better quality of services from the banks through competition.

“There should be greater emphasis not only on policy measures but on financial education. Not enough is being done to provide appropriate financial knowledge and skills to consumers,” he says.

One industry observer concurred that the responsible lending guidelines will have the biggest impact on the lower income group.

“This group of people are already earning a low salary and with stricter lending rules, getting loans could be made more difficult.”

National Housebuyers Association (HBA) secretary-general Chang Kim Loong says the responsible lending guidelines will have an impact on the local property sector, especially in the entry level market where aspiring job seekers purchase their first home and for married couples hoping to be able to purchase or upgrade their homes.

Selvaraj urges the central bank to ease the loan application process.

“Depending on location and from state to state, the price ranges from RM150,000 to RM500,000. This is the price range that speculators have been targeting in the past and have artificially inflated such property prices, but it’s still too early to gauge the effectiveness or effects of the responsible lending guidelines.

“It is hoped that as property speculators are denied financing to purchase such homes and with only real demand in the picture, the prices of such properties will gradually decline to more realistic prices.”

According to reports, applications for loans for the purpose of purchasing residential properties contracted 6.3% in January from a growth of 11.3% in December 2011.

Yam says Rehda understands that the implementation of the rationale for responsible lending guidelines was due to the large household debts and the 40% increase in transaction value (from RM100bil to RM140bil) between 2010 and 2011.

“On the short to medium term, this restriction would ultimately cause a slowdown in borrowing which is the intended effect, and it will cause a negative effect on home ownership.

“The mixed signal arising from this new lending rule is that while on the one hand the Government is encouraging the building of more affordable medium-cost housing by introducing “My First Home Scheme” and “PR1MA” homes to stimulate demand, on the other we have this Bank Negara announcement,” he says.

Yam feels that the central bank’s new lending criteria seems to be in contradiction to the earlier Budget announcement in October last year.

“This does not sit well with developers who are taking the cue and feel positive about home-buyers being offered greater opportunity and various incentives to own homes only to be somewhat dampened by this new requirement,” he says.

Positive measure?

Khong & Jaafar Sdn Bhd managing director Elvin Fernandez says he is supportive of Bank Negara’s responsible lending guidelines.

“The new rulings are good because they are pre-emptive measures to prevent a housing bubble. The measures are making themselves felt as price increases in some hot spots that were a cause for concern have now stalled and also the trend from it spreading down the line or to other areas have also been curtailed.

Fernandez supports the guidelines as they prevent a housing bubble.

“House prices rising are not good. Prices rising with fundamentals such as household income and rental returns are good,” he says.

Chang also applauds Bank Negara’s responsible lending guidelines.

“The guideline requires the financial services providers (FSPs) to provide assessment of individual affordability and provide suitable and responsible advice to customers on their capacity to take on additional financing,” he says.

According to Chang, the FSPs or banks will be required to undertake a comprehensive assessment on borrowers’ sources of income and verify against independent sources to ensure that they have the ability to repay the loans throughout the tenure of the loan.

Income assessment shall be based on the borrowers’ net income, which is the gross salary minus the statutory deductions such as Employees Provident Fund contributions and tax deductions.

“HBA has been advocating for a very long time for FSPs to exercise prudence and good judgment when disbursing loans. Due to stiff competition and key performance indicators set by the board and senior management, (FSPs) have been too lenient and aggressive in providing financing, resulting in artificially inflated property prices and many young adults being declared bankrupt due to their inability to repay their debt obligations,” says Chang.

Chang says that as part of the responsible lending guidelines, Bank Negara has repealed its requirement of a maximum debt service ratio (DSR). For the uninitiated, the DSR means that the debt repayments are divided by the borrower’s income.

According to him, prior to the responsible lending guidelines, the maximum DSR was set at one-third (or 33%) of gross income for single loan repayments and half (or 50%) of gross income for all loan repayments combined.

The exception was given to civil servants who could borrow from the cooperatives with a DSR of up to 60% of their gross income.

“Hence, if the borrower’s gross income is RM3,000, the maximum single loan repayment is RM990 and maximum aggregate of all loan repayments cannot exceed RM1,500 per month,” Chang says.

Under the responsible lending guidelines, the DSR based on gross income has been repealed and FSPs are now free to set their own DSR based on the net income of the borrower.

Chang says the issue now will be that prospective borrowers do not know if they would qualify for a loan as different FSPs have different DSR guidelines.

“There is a shock-effect with FSPs being told to totally disregard all forms of variable income such as discretionary bonuses, commissions and overtime and prospective borrowers that are dependent on these types of income are adversely affected.

“Based on our market sources, some FSPs are willing to consider these types of income but at a discounted rate and this causes great confusion to prospective borrowers as they attempt to shop around for loans,” he says.

Rehda feels the affordable housing segment will probably be the most affected.

Chang says HBA is urging the central bank to retain its “maximum DSR” requirement “to set a cap” as guidance for FSPs to follow.

“As it is, even with the previous guidelines on one-third and half, many FSPs have openly flouted the guidelines with reckless financing, resulting in artificially-inflated property prices and many young adults being declared bankrupt due to unmanageable debt levels.

“With the caps removed and FSPs being free to set their own lending policies, the situation of reckless financing may get even worse. Although HBA agrees that market forces are the best form of regulation, it has been shown that we operate in an imperfect market and hence the need to retain DSR limits for FSPs to follow,” he says.

As a means to improve lending, the HBA is also calling on the central bank to issue additional guidelines on the recognition of variable income, where the borrower can show a good track record for such income.

“This is because certain industries such as in the sales and manufacturing sectors, the basic income is often very low and the discretionary income serves as an incentive for employees to perform.

“If such discretionary income is to be totally disregarded, it is feared that such employees may never qualify for any sort of loan from legal channels and end up resorting to loan sharks.”

By EUGENE MAHALINGAM eugenicz@thestar.com.my

Related posts/stories:

Reining in household debt by Bank Negara Malaysia

Bank Negara Malaysia lending guideline is a blessing in Mar 03, 2012

Principles and targets of lending guidelines

MAA says new rules already impact sales of new vehicles

Bankers and lawyers should know better

FOOD FOR THOUGHT By DATUK ALAN TONG

BUYING a property that eventually becomes abandoned is a painful experience for many house buyers. It not only hurts purchasers who have lost their hard-earned money but also affects the property industry’s reputation which has taken a beating due to unethical activities of a few culprits.

This is particularly so when the abandoned project is not caused by factors such as economic downturn or withdrawal of purchasers, but solely due to irresponsible people who claim to be “developers” but do not hold a licence to do so.

It was recently reported that our Housing and Local Government Ministry has identified 195 abandoned developments that were unlicensed in our country. I am puzzled as to how these “developers” are able to start their projects when they do not even have their licence to apply for financing if they require a bridging loan, and is their sales and purchase (S&P) agreement properly attested by a lawyer before they start selling?

In this context, what can be done and who should play a part in reducing these unlawful developers? Assessing our existing housing development process would provide us with some ideas.

When a developer plans for a housing project, he must first get the necessary approvals and licences from the relevant authorities such as the development order, building plan, advertising permit and developer’s licence. The developer then may need to source for a bridging loan from a financial institution and this is followed by getting lawyers to prepare the legal documents which include the S&P agreement.

When the project is launched to the market, the developer will require the purchasers to sign the S&P agreements in order to finalise the purchase. Should the purchaser acquire a housing loan from a bank, the bank will come into the picture to process the loan application submitted by the purchaser. Those are the basic procedures involved in developing and marketing a housing project in Malaysia.

For unlicensed development, the regulatory bodies are not in the picture. In such cases, it becomes apparent that the lawyers and/or bankers, both representing the house purchaser, have a role to play as the first line of defence to protect the interest of the purchaser.

Hence, there are questions that begged to be answered. How is it possible for financial institutions to approve the end financing loan for a property development in the absence of all or part of the required approvals and licences? The same questions are posted to lawyers who prepare the legal documents for unlicensed development.

I believe everyone has a role in identifying irresponsible players in the industry, especially the bankers and lawyers with their better access to information and strong regulatory network as compared to the general public. As a purchaser and a customer, you would have expected your banker and lawyer to carry out their due diligence duties to ensure that your interest is not compromised.

In other industries, professional practitioners who do not convey the right message and do not protect customers’ interests can be given stern punishment as their action may be deemed as negligence, fraud or even criminal breach of trust.

According to the record of National House Buyers Association, in the case of Keng Soon Finance Bhd (1996), a financial institution had granted a loan to an unlicensed developer, and it was decided that the loan and the security offered were invalid. The bank could not institute the foreclosure proceedings on the land and therefore could not recover its loan.

Under our Housing Development Act, a property developer that engages in, carries out or undertakes housing development without having been duly licensed can be fined between RM250,000 and RM500,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or both. This is an avenue to take action against unlicensed developers. While we have the law in place, it is equally important to ensure strong enforcement comes along.

For house buyers, you are strongly advised to purchase property from reputable developers and to do thorough “shopping” and analysis before signing on the dotted lines. Responsible developers are keen to work hand-in-hand with purchasers and appreciate the role of the National House Buyers Association which advocates the protection of house buyers in Malaysia. We should stand together as a team to fight against irresponsible developers.

And for anyone of you who think that you have bought into one of those unlicensed developments mentioned earlier in the article, it is time to write and call your banker or lawyer for clarification.

Datuk Alan Tong is the group chairman of Bukit Kiara Properties, he was the FIABCI World president in 2005-2006 and was named Property Man of The Year 2010 by FIABCI Malaysia.

Related posts:

Invest in Malaysia’s Real Estates 

Houses prices hardly fall 

Malaysian High-end property expected slower

The fear factor in property  

What is a banker really worth?

Barclays made a serious error over the pay of John Varley, the bank’s former chief executive, who stepped down in 2010 with a ‘goodbye package’ of nearly £4m – it wasn’t enough!

What is a banker really worth?

Sir Philip Hampton, RBS chairman, warns that the vilification of Fred Goodwin, RBS’s former boss, has morphed into the persecution of his replacement, Stephen Hester. Photo: PA. By Jeff Randall – Telegraph

So says Sir Nigel Rudd, Barclays’ former deputy chairman, who led its remuneration committee.

As Britain’s state-controlled banks, RBS and Lloyds, prepare to unveil results and bonuses later this week, Sir Nigel’s comments in my television documentary (Sky News 7pm, Wednesday) will enrage critics who believe that bankers remain detached from public anger over jackpot salaries.

Sir Nigel, however, is adamant that Mr Varley made a “huge difference” to Barclays during the credit crunch, when rival banks fell apart. By raising funds privately, Barclays was able to survive without a bail-out from UK taxpayers.

“John Varley was underpaid. Because what he did [for Barclays] during the crisis was phenomenal,” Sir Nigel says. In his last year, Mr Varley received a salary of £1.1m, a bonus of £2..2m and a performance cash incentive of £550,000.

Sir Nigel, who is now chairman of BAA, the airports operator, offers advice to ministers wrestling with demands for a pay clampdown while trying to maximise value in the state’s bank shareholdings: “If I was the Prime Minister, I’d ban the use of fairness as a word, because I don’t think you can be fair.”

Sir Philip Hampton, RBS’s current chairman, warns that understandable anger about the banks’ past failings is becoming destructive. In particular, the vilification of Fred Goodwin, RBS’s former boss, has morphed into the persecution of his replacement, Stephen Hester.

“We do lynch mobs better than most, but I think the opprobrium is directed now at the wrong people – the people that are fixing the problems rather than the people that are causing the problems,” Sir Philip says.

He believes the main flaw with bank bonuses is that they were linked to profits which turned out to be “illusory”. The banks did not understand the risks they were embracing, but it took a while for profits to collapse, by which time the bankers had pocketed the cash.

Alistair Darling, who was chancellor when the financial turmoil erupted, says that many highly paid bankers were in denial and remain so. “One or two to this day still don’t realise they did anything wrong, which most people find just flabbergasting.”

In a reference to Mr Goodwin and his top team, Mr Darling says: “They didn’t know what they were doing and we, not them, to a large extent are paying the price for that.”

Mr Goodwin’s old adversary, Sir Peter Burt, who led Bank of Scotland when it was outbid by RBS in a takeover battle for National Westminster in 2000 , doesn’t hide his dislike of the disgraced banker but deplores the nationwide “witch-hunt” against him: “Perhaps Fred should count himself lucky there weren’t any lamp-posts low enough from which to hang him.”

Related posts:

RBS, biggest British stated-owned bank losses of £3.5bn !

Lloyds, Britain’s biggest mortgage lender plunges to £3.5bn loss for 2011

Financial Advisors Get Social

 Raymond James Financial Advisors Get Social
Image representing LinkedIn as depicted in Cru...

Tom GroenfeldtTom Groenfeldt, Forbes Contributor

Financial advisors at Raymond James are now able to use social media tools including LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter through the Actiance compliance tool, Socialite. Advisors also have optional access to a library or pre-approved content and tools to measure engagement.

Mike White, marketing director at the Florida-based financial services firm, said the Actiance alliance fulfills a commitment made early in the year to provide social media tools for advisors.

Financial firms have been slow to adopt social media, he said, and they have watched to see how regulators would interpret social media communications.

“In addition to incorporating the technology and archiving platform with Actiance, we have developed guidelines, training sessions and marketing and communications support to help advisors leverage social media in their client engagement and new prospecting activities,”  added White.

In the two months since the Actiance rollout, 1,200 of the firm’s 5,000 advisors have signed up. The company offers interactive video training to show advisors how social media can be used properly.

“We know there have been a lot to mis-steps [with social media] by public figures and we want out advisors and our brand to be protected in the process.”

Early adopters at Raymond James spread across all ages; the fastest to move to social media are the advisors who are most marketing oriented, White said. As the technology becomes easier to use, the age skew is not as pronounced as it once was, he added. Grandparents are among the most active users of Raymond James online services.

White thinks advisors will use social media both to stay in communication with existing clients and to prospect for new ones.

Raymond James has several people in its 200-strong compliance group who review all social media content before it goes out, with the result that approvals can usually be done the same day content is submitted. Tweets and posts go through a workflow process to provide the firm compliance oversight while allowing advisors to offer a personal touch.

“Our understanding [of the regulations] is that we do not have to review communications ahead of time, but we are being conservative.”

White said that in addition to approved canned content the company offers Tweets and posts from its economist or stock strategist.

“One great thing about Actiance is they were relatively early to the game of social media so they understand the importance of providing flexibility and insight to the communications.” The company also reviews blogs by its advisors before they are posted, a process which White said is now at the point social media was a few years ago.

“We treat blogs as ads that have to be pre-approved.”

The Aite Group, a financial research firm, entitled a recent report on social media for financial advisors “The Bloom is off the Rose.” Roughly 7 in 10 financial advisors use social media for personal purposes and half use it for business, figures which have increased since 2009, said Ron Shevlin, senior analyst with Aite Group and co-author of this report.

Use of LinkedIn has increased for business purposes and the time spent on Facebook, Twitter and blogs has declined among financial advisors. Advisors don’t spend much time on leading social media finance sites such as Stockpickr or Wikinvest; only a third of the advisors surveyed were even familiar with them.

Advisors are seeing diminishing returns from social media, according to Aite. Reaching new prospects was cited by only 19 percent, half the percentage in 2009 while increasing revenue or fees linked to social media declined from 16 percent to 6 percent.

Just six percent of advisors who don’t already use social media plan to do so over the next year. Thirty-eight percent said it wasn’t worth their time and 34 percent just don’t like to communicate with customers that way. Nearly three-quarters said their firms have policies that limit or ban the use of social media.

Vendors had some suggestions for the best ways to use social media. Actiance told Aite Group that responding to clients’ postings, such as a new child or a new job, with an appropriate messages is effective.  Echoing what White said about early adopters eMoney Advisor noted that advisors who are good at marketing are good at using social media. Financial Social Media’s recommendations suggest why some advisors are losing interest — they recommended Tweeting three to five times per day and updating LinkedIn and Facebook at least twice a day. That suggests a substantial time commitment. Other vendors of social media tools including SocialVolt, Socialware, SocMediaFin, SunGard, ThomsonReuters and Wired Advisor had a variety of suggestions about defining an approach to marketing, listening to the market and building out social networks.

Aite concluded that many financial advisors have decided that social media is not living up to its hype.

“The absence of tangible benefits from social media is muting advisors’ perception of its potential importance,” said Shevlin. Financial firms should expand their focus beyond compliance to look at effectiveness, added Aite, offering several specific suggestions for defining messages, choosing the proper platform and improving marketing skills.

Newscribe : get free news in real time

The audacity of hedge funds and their lack of righteousness

Lehman Brothers Rockefeller centre

THINK ASIAN By ANDREW SHENG

IN the old days, technical books were read for one’s education, but they are so boring that you would fall asleep. You read novels instead for their drama, romance and excitement. In this fast moving world where daily events are more thrilling than fiction, books like More Money than God by Sebastian Mallaby make you want to turn the next page.

Written by a former journalist, who today works for the US Council for Foreign Relations, the book has combined blood and guts story-telling of the hedge fund industry with careful analysis, tracing meticulously how the industry works like Sherlock Holmes. The narrative is so thrilling that when the author described the scene where the hedge funds took down Thailand in 1997, my hair stood on end. I was a ringside witness but I had not known who was doing what and how they did it.

If you want to know how hedge funds sniff out opportunities by talking to honest and nave central bankers who admit that they made policy mistakes and then make more money than God, read this book. It is both a clinical analysis of how hedge funds emerged from nowhere to become the market movers of today, as well as a morality story that raises more questions than it is able to answer. It may not be illegal (at least under existing law) to do a trade that tips a nation into abject poverty because there were tragic policy mistakes, but is it morally right to take home billions by accelerating the process of “creative destruction”?

The central insight of the hedge fund industry is brilliant it is that the academic finance theory is all wrong and we are all naive to believe otherwise. Modern finance theory begins with the assumption that the market is efficient and knows best. The efficient market hypothesis is based on the view that it is not easy to beat the market.

However, the hedge fund industry makes most money from the inefficiencies of the market. If you are not convinced, how between May 1980 and August 1998, the Tiger Fund earned an average of 31.7% per year after fees, beating the 12.7% return on the S&P500 index. The offshoots of the Tiger Fund, created by people who left the Fund to set up on their own, generated returns of 11.9% per year between 2000 and 2009, compared with the average of 5.3% per year for the S&P index.

Mallaby takes the story from the 1949 creation of the first hedged fund by Alfred Winslow Jones to the emergence of a sophisticated and complex US$2 trillion industry. He weaves a wondrous tale of how tribal and interconnected the industry became as it emerged.

Nobel Laureate Paul Samuelson, famous for arguing that randomly chosen stock selection would beat professionally managed mutual funds, was a founder investor of the Commodities Corporation, one of the first “quants” to use computer analysis to trade commodities. The Commodities Corporation was the nursery for three future hedge fund giants, Bruce Kovner (Caxton), Paul Tudor Jones (Tudor Investments) and Louis Bacon of Moore Capital.

Louis Bacon had connections with two of the Big Three in the early 1990s, being related by marriage to Julian Robertson (Tiger Funds) and worked briefly with Michael Steinhardt. The last of the Big Three is George Soros (Quantum Fund), who became famous as the man who made 1bil speculating in sterling and has become a philosopher/philanthropist. Many of these funds were involved during the speculative raids on Asian currencies during the 1997/98 Asian crisis and it is likely that many of them are having a food fest in Europe right now.

The last chapter of the book is a defense of why hedge funds should not be regulated. “The case for believing in the industry is not that it is populated with saints but that its incentives and culture are ultimately less flawed than those of other financial institutions.”

In Mallaby’s view, “whereas large parts of the financial system have proved too big to fail, hedge funds are generally small enough to fail. When they blow up, they cost taxpayers nothing.” Yes, but when their prime brokers blew up with them, it cost taxpayers trillions.

Here lies the contradiction of their existence. Hedge funds are symbiotically tied to their prime brokers, the investment banks and large global banks that provide the leverage for their activities. No leverage means no ability to hedge or speculate. The latter group is too big to fail and its proprietary trading, combined with those of the hedge funds, are large enough to move markets.

The earlier argument that the prime brokers would safeguard systemic stability by indirectly regulating hedge funds (many of whom are former staff of the prime brokers) failed when Lehmans collapsed.

Hedge funds thrive because of regulatory and information arbitrage. The more the regular banking system is regulated, the more business drifts to the under-regulated shadow banking institutions.

Mallaby argues that it remains unproven whether heavier regulation will succeed. The regulators were scared to regulate, because of moral hazard, that is, the industry would take higher risks and the government would pay. Unfortunately, whenever there is a financial crisis, the government would be blamed and have to pay, irrespective of heavy or light regulation.

While hedge funds are not of public concern if they remain small, their herd like effect becomes a real problem when the momentum play can drive even mid-sized nations over the brink. Europe today is a live experiment of gigantic proportions. If someone makes tens of billions through speculation from the failure of some European countries and millions become unemployed, it is no longer a regulatory issue. Rightly or wrongly, this is a political crisis of the first order.

More Money than God should be the first book for everyone to read if they are to understand how the hedge funds dissect the European crisis as an opportunity.

Andrew Sheng is President of Fung Global Institute and author of From Asian to Global Financial Crisis.

Banks offering more attractive home loans to boost market share

Rising competition prompts banks offering more attractive home loans

By DALJIT DHESI daljit@thestar.com.my

PETALING JAYA: With razor thin margins due to rising competition in the home loans market, banks are now aggressively value-adding their home loans to stay competitive and boost their market share.

OCBC Bank (M) Bhd head of secured lending Thoo Mee Ling said banks must value-add to their generic home loan offerings in order to not just survive but thrive, especially in this competitive climate.

“What separates those who thrive from the others today is how much they have moved from price to innovation. It is heartening to see a greater emphasis today on enhancements to loans products, rather than mere reliance on price cutting previously.

“This is where banks are getting even more creative by adding in the necessary finer details to a product that otherwise appears bland. Home loans with features and benefits that are tailored specifically to complement customers’ lifestyles often serve to compel them to look beyond price and into a more holistic perspective,” she told StarBiz.

File picture shows a housing are in Shah Alam – Starpic by BRIAN MOH

Thoo said customers were nowlooking for more than just a home loan as purchasing a house was simply the beginning.

Banks would also need to cater to their immediate follow-on needs like renovations and furnishing, for example, and this was where additional financing that came with the home loan would be helpful, she reckoned.

At OCBC Bank, she said there were bespoke home loans that were tied in with study loans, renovation loans and even overseas property financing schemes, adding that each of these took into consideration things that went beyond mere property purchase.

She said it was undeniable that investing in a product to bring in customers and then introduce them to other products remained a good strategy for growing the business, but banks would still need to strengthen their range of offerings to become a one-stop shop for their customers.

Outstanding home loans, valued at RM261bil, accounted for about 27% of the total banking system’s loans as at end-September 2011. Although there has been strong expansion in home loans in the last couple of years, the proportion of home loans has been hovering at 27% in the past five years.

,B>Thoo: ‘What separates those who thrive from the others today is how much they have moved from price to innovation.’

Commenting on home loans, RAM Ratings’ head of financial institution ratings Wong Yin Ching said competition among banks in the home loan market had been rife, resulting in razor thin margins in recent years.

This stemmed from the homogeneity of the home loan products, whereby any innovation in product features and price competition (by lowering rates) were quickly replicated and matched by market players, she said.

Wong added: “While some banks have instilled more discipline in its risk-reward pricing, aggressive pricing is still seen in the market and this is unhealthy and unsustainable in the long run.

“Going forward, we think that personalised services and quicker turnaround times by banks would be key to stay relevant in the home loan market.”

Alliance Bank Malaysia Bhd executive vice president and head of consumer banking Ronnie Lim said competitive pricing aside, Malaysian banks were now re-inventing the mortgage landscape by extending superior customer experience at every customer touch point.

For the bank, he said having mortgage specialists, who also acted as advisory consultants, among others, had enabled Alliance Bank to become one of the key mortgage players in the market.

He said the bank has been growing its mortgage specialists force extensively to not only engage customers effectively but also deepen its relationship with developers, lawyers and real estate agents.

Lim added the bank was also able to provide fast “approval in principle” service to assist customers looking for home financing solutions to make informed decisions before committing to their choice property.

For mortgage players, he said one of the key challenges was about overcoming margin compression and the bank was able to achieve this by introducing new systems and processes to help staff increase their productivity.

This had since yielded results: “For the year under review, sales productivity has increased threefold compared to a year ago,” he said.

Financial literacy vital when investing in funds

Maybank Tower in downtown Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

By LEONG HUNG YEE hungyee@thestar.com.my

 It pays to be updated on investment knowledge

LOOK before you leap. That’s the advice experts in the unit trust industry have given to investors, either old or new, when deciding to put their money into any fund.

Their reasoning behind it is that the products being offered to investors are no longer simple and basic. With the ever growing diversity and sophistication of unit trust products, consumers have to continuously enhance their knowledge and capabilities to maximise as well as protect their investments.

Fund managers say unit trust funds offer an option to retail investors especially those looking at the possibility of earning higher returns compared with conventional savings like fixed deposits.

However, a lot of investors do not really have a good understanding on what they are investing in and they think they can simply park the investment in some funds and let it grow.

Lim Hong Tat says it is a challenge for investors to stay informed on market movements in today’s environment.

“Over the long term, education on the basics of financial planning was important for the growth of the unit trust industry,” a fund manager says.

MAAKL Mutual Bhd CEO Wong Boon Choy opines that more can certainly be done in investor education. “I am sure the Federation of Investment Manager Malaysia would have probably started working with all relevant parties who are involved in promoting financial literacy.”

Malayan Banking Bhd (Maybank) deputy president and head of community financial services Lim Hong Tat points out that one of the issues it is facing is educating its customers on unit trust investment.

He says it is a challenge for investors to stay informed on market movements in today’s environment.

“Educating our customers on unit trust investment is one of the key areas the bank is embarking on. Unit trust investments are meant for a medium to long-term investment horizon, and generally provide better returns according to the risk that accompanies the investment,” Lim says.

The dollar cost averaging concept, he says, is another focus where the bank is highlighting to customers, such as to invest the same amount of money over a period of time, especially now when market volatility is high.

“By doing so, investors avoid entering the unit trust funds at the peak or bottom of the market cycle, and hence spread out the risk,” Lim says.

HwangDBS Investment Management Bhd (HwangDBS IM) chief product officer Steve Lim says that despite the growth of the unit trust industry over the past 10 years, there is still a need to increase investors awareness and understanding about unit trusts and its benefits.

Good returns

“Many of them expect good returns, for example double-digit returns, within a year, hence defeating the purpose of investing in such instruments for retirement and financial planning. Since they have a short-term investment outlook, they tend to time the market. Many of them have a herd mentality and will continue to sell and redeem when bad news flows in.

“Also, mis-selling and lack of product understanding have been the bugbear of our industry,” Lim says.

He adds that this had resulted in losses by many investors and a prevailing misconception that unit trust investing as a whole is a highly risky and complicated venture.

“Nevertheless, we believe that with the right financial education, we will be able to address the unit trust industry issues and misconceptions as well as contributing to the growing confidence and popularity of the industry segment.”

Steve says the level of personal financial literacy today is low and with growing consumerism as well as changing customer expectations, there is a need to reinforce greater financial literacy to help people better manage their personal finances. Proper consumer education is needed if new growth engines, such as private pensions, wealth management and asset management, with their more complex and sophisticated products, are to take off.

While industry players are advocating a greater need to increase investor education, some investors do not really have a basic grasp of what a unit trust is or even why they should invest in unit trust.

Lee Khee Chuan, a Securities Commission-licensed financial adviser representative, says unit trust as an investment vehicle has distinct advantages over other asset classes of investment.

He says, for example, unit trust has better liquidity compared with land banking products.

Wide selection

“It (unit trust) can start with a minimum capital of RM1,000 but it is impossible with property or blue chip shares. Unit trust also offers a wide selection ranging from bond funds to aggressive equity funds; furthermore it gives investors exposure to multi regions. It also allows investors to invest regularly using the dollar cost averaging method with a minimum capital as low as RM100 per month through bank account deductions,” Lee says.

Lee cautions that investing in unit trust does carry investment risk; the price of units may go down as well as up.

“It is still prudent to diversify among unit trust funds with differing fund objectives even though unit trust fund sales agents may tell you that unit trust is diversified among different stocks or stock markets.

“One can also check out value-added services provided by some licensed financial advisory companies in Malaysia which offer a model fund portfolio which is effectively diversified to clients because they have an in-house fund manager to construct and monitor the portfolio of unit trust funds,” he adds.

Related Post:

Investing in Malaysian unit trust industry

Investing in Malaysian unit trust industry

High fees dampener for unit trust

By DALJIT DHESI daljit@thestar.com.my

Unit trusts are gaining popularity among investors as an important source of investment and retirement savings. But are investors getting a fair deal from the high charges being imposed by the industry and will lower charges really mean better returns for investors?

THERE is nothing that really fazes a seasoned investor. They are used to losing and making money on the stock market. They understand the game.

But if there’s one thing that irks veteran investor Jason Yap, who has been a unit trust investor for a decade, is that he already starts losing money before he has a chance to make a profit.

What irritates Yap, who is a retiree, is the high upfront fee he has to endure, and that has a profound impact on the return on his investment.

“The upfront fee of between 5% and 7% is rather high and should be lowered for us to enjoy better returns. The upfront charge one has to pay when buying into a fund will impact the returns received from the fund. It is pointless to invest in something that at the end of the day will bite into’ the returns or monies received from the particular investment.

“Many of us have taken out monies from our savings to invest in unit trusts. For unit trust to be effective in boosting retirement savings, the charges should be lowered or even abolished,” he adds.

That argument is as old as the industry itself. Since establishing its roots in 1959, the unit trust industry in Malaysia has grown steadily over the years and has really blossomed since the various periods of market turbulence, especially the Asian financial crisis in 1997/98.

Foo says a dichotomy exists in Malaysia where different rates are being charged to different entities.

One of the major qualms among investors for some time now is its high sales charges.

The main grouse has been the upfront charges, which is money people have to pay when they buy into a fund. Then there is the exit charges, which are money paid when they cash out of a fund, and the annual management fee, which is a charge imposed by the fund to manage people’s money.

The current upfront fee ranges from 5% to 6.5% on the invested amount, except for money from Employees Provident Fund (EPF) to invest in funds (under the EPF Members Investment Scheme) which is capped to 3% since Jan 1, 2008.

The exit fee may be 1% or higher but much depends on the structure of the fund. The annual management fee ranges from 1% to 1.5% and the trustee fees is from 0.5% to 1%.

A call to review sales charges

Is there a need for the industry to review its charges to make the unit trust industry more appealing to investors? Some industry observers think so.

Malaysian Financial Planners and Advisors Association (MFPAA) deputy president Robert Foo thinks front-end fees should be reduced or completely removed so that investors can enjoy higher returns.

The other purpose of such a radical but common practice in matured markets is that the whole industry can then move from a sales push culture to that of a professional advisory culture where investors can work with licensed and professional financial advisors if they so wish.

“It should be noted that in developed countries like Britain and Australia, there is a regulatory push for such financial products to be delivered on a fee for service basis rather than on a high push environment with upfront sales commissions. In Britain, the government has legislated that by Jan 1, 2013, all financial products are not allowed to have commissions attached.

“Agents or financial advisors are required to charge investors directly for services provided, therefore ensuring that their interest aligns with that of the investors,” he adds.

Foo, who is also the managing director of licensed financial planning company MyFP Services Sdn Bhd, says a dichotomy exists in Malaysia where different rates are being charged to different entities.

For money withdrawn from the EPF, people pay 3% to buy into a unit trust, but for walk-in customers, they are charged 6%.

“Does it mean that your EPF money is more valuable than your hard cash?” he asks.

“I think the upfront fee is too high and eats into the returns of investors. The average compounded rate of return of equity unit trusts in Malaysia over the last 10 years is only about 7.5% per annum, and losing 6% upfront is too high a cost for investors,” Foo says.

An industry observer says the Securities Commission should consider compelling unit trust companies to waive the upfront charges, similar to funds under Fidelity Investment, which is one of the largest mutual fund companies in the world with over US$1.46 trillion in assets under management.

Foo says it is cheaper to buy funds through the Internet, for example through www.fundsupermart.com.my or eunittrust.com.my, which imposes an upfront charge of 1% to 2%.

Much higher than regional peers

Licensed financial planner Jeremy Tan of Standard Financial Planner Sdn Bhd says the upfront fee is considered high compared with countries like Singapore and Hong Kong.

Tan says that depending on the sophistication of the product, the unfront fee in Singapore ranges from 3% to 5%, but adds that there is an alternative platform for investing in unit trusts, with upfront fees ranging from 0.75% to 2%, depending on the amount invested. In this latest alternative, there is a wrap fee of up to 1% per annum.

He says the alternative is also available in Malaysia, where the upfront fee is lower than what is currently charged by investing directly through the fund house.

He expects the industry to eventually lower the charges in line with other Asian countries such as Singapore and Hong Kong.

Foo says that due to the open nature of the Hong Kong and Singapore markets, where local funds have to compete with global fund houses at the retail and wholesale market sector, the fund companies can reduce the upfront charges to even zero. Also, there is no tied agency structure in these countries unlike Malaysia.

Lower charges, better returns?

Those arguing for lower charges will undoubtedly look at the average return of 7.5% per annum over the past decade by unit trust firms and say a lower fee will bump up returns.

Tan, however, believes lowering the sales charges will not necessary provide better returns to investor. It depends on the performance of the fund manager or the fund house in relation to the funds invested among others.

Pacific Mutual Fund Bhd executive director and CEO Gary Gan concurs. He says the performance of a fund and its relevance to investors is key rather than merely looking at charges.

At the end of the day, the basic rule of investing is making an informed decision. This means investors need to have sufficient information and knowledge of the product they are investing in, he notes.

MAAKL Mutual Bhd CEO Wong Boon Choy says any attempt to restructure the front-end and back-end charges will require very careful study and strong will on the part of the authorities to make tough changes to the rules and regulations on existing distribution channels which is dominated by a tied-agency system.

“Agent commissions have already been compressed when the EPF capped the maximum service charge to 3%. This translates to more than 50% reduction in the normal service charge. The front-end service charge is the primary means of compensating the agents for the service they provide to investors,” he explains.

Wong, who is also the president of the Financial Planning Association of Malaysia (FPAM), estimates the tied agency force to be over 60,000 at the end of last year.

Meanwhile, Areca Capital Sdn Bhd CEO Danny Wong feels the market should determine the fee structure as ultimately good performance and achievingthe investor’s objective are more important.

Tan says the upfront fees are considered high compared with Singapore and Hong Kong.

He says there are funds with upfront fees distributed by banks or unit trust companies as well as those with almost no front-end fees being solddirectly by niche fund managers or via online portals. He points out that there is no evidence of superiority of either practice as the choice of investment is left to the investors.

Lowering or abolishing sales charges, says Steve Lim, chief product officer of HwangDBS Investment Management Bhd, will provide investors a quicker path to garnering returns on their investment, but at the same time, might encourage many to make regular withdrawals.

From the perspective of unit trust management companies, the lowering of sales charge to 3% has helped change investors’ mindset and allowed them to realise that unit trust is a viable investment and pension planning instrument, Lim adds.

CIMB-Principal Asset Management Bhd CEO Campbell Tupling says the industry fee structure in Malaysia is primarily on the front-end as the back-end fees are not significant.

Alternatives

“Investors know what they are paying for. Fees are transparent and clearly stated. Investors are free to choose how they wish to be serviced. There are other means of investing at a lower cost, for example exchange traded funds (ETFs). However, investors have yet to embrace ETFs in a meaningful way,” he adds.

With high sales charges of unit trust funds, which generally are open ended funds, will it make more sense for investors to switch their investments into close-end funds or other instruments like ETFs?

iCapital.biz Bhd managing director Tan Teng Boo does not think so. Unless the fund manager has an excellent track record, he says it is hard to promote and list a close-end fund like icapital.biz Bhd on Bursa Malaysia.

Tan says any such fund has to go through an initial public offering process and is not so profitable for fund management companies to promote and list close-end funds as there are no entry fees or front-end loadings or commissions, he adds. At the same time, he says investors in Malaysia are not familiar with closed-end funds.

icapital.biz Bhd is the only listed closed-end fund in the country.

From the company’s records, icapital.biz Bhd’s cumulative returns for the five-year period (between Oct 19, 2005 and Dec 30, 2010) stood at 109%. (Note: the fund was not traded on Dec 31, 2010).

The top half of the Equity Malaysia Funds (equity unit trust funds) returns range from 84% to 196% during the five-year period (Dec 31, 2005 to Dec 31, 2010).

Wong says that in general, unit trust funds are more popular than closed-end funds. With the so-called guaranteed buy-back feature, investors can be assured that the unit trust management company will buy back their units in the event the investors need to make a redemption or liquidation.

“Unlike unit trust funds, the trading price of the closed-end fund is dictated by market force and investor sentiment. In the event the investors of the closed-end funds want to liquidate their holdings, they can only liquidate or sell through the brokers on the stock exchange where the units are subject to the market forces of supply and demand.

“Therefore, the prices can be volatile in the secondary market where investors may sell their units at a discount or premium. In this case, liquidity is one of the major concerns for investors of closed-end funds,” he says.

Foo feels investing in closed-end funds or open-end funds has its pros and cons, but much depends on the skill and capability of the investment manager to deliver the returns by taking advantage of the inherent features of the two structures.

Tan of Standard Financial Planner says more research and analysis on close-end funds is required before investing, compared with unit trust investment where the fund’s objectives of distribution policies, inherent risks, minimum investment period are clearly spelt out in its prospectus.

Every investor wants to preserve capital invested and a return corresponding with the risk taken, he explains.

Currently, there are over 580 unit trust funds in the market compared with only five listed ETFs on Bursa, namely CIMB FTSE Asean40, CIMB FTSE China 25, FTSE Bursa Malaysia KLCI ETF, MyETF Dow Jones Islamic Market Malaysia Titans 25 and ABF Malaysia Bond Index Fund.

For example, returns to date (Jan 1 to Oct 31) of FTSE Bursa Malaysia KLCI ETF stands at -0.16%. The FTSE Bursa Malaysia KLCI was down 2.71% during the same period.

Lim says ETFs can be a good choice for investors who have knowledge of the stock market and have the expertise to make investment decisions on their own. For the normal saver, however, unit trusts tend to be more appropriate as the investments are managed by professionals who have the skill sets to make complex investment decisions.

Gan, however, feels investors should consider other factors rather than solely relying on returns data. Factors like volatility of the instrument and fund size are equally important when investing in a particular fund.

Growth momentum and key challenges

With the current uncertainties in the global economy coupled by the eurozone debt crisis, is the unit trust industry able to ride out the global economic slowdown to continue its growth path?

Industry players generally think the industry will continue to grow albeit at a slower phase. CIMB-Principal’s Tupling projects a low single-digit growth for the rest of the year and anticipates the industry’s asset under management to grow about 5% to RM104bil this year.

In terms of net asset value (NAV), the investments in unit trust funds held by 14 million account holders stood at RM240bil last year compared with RM44bil in 2000, an increase of about 45% per annum.

Wong feels the market should determine the fee structure as good performance and achieving objectives are vital.

He says that new investment in equity funds has slowed but it is not a significant drop, adding that redemptions are also lower than expected.

The growing risk aversion, he says, will result in higher demand for more defensive and conservative asset classes like dividend-yielding equities and fixed income securities.

Lim of HwangDBS expects single-digit growth this year due to poor market sentiment and high risk aversion in view of the uncertainties in the global economy.

He says the main challenges faced by the industry is the need to address the question on how growth momentum can be maintained as well as to promote unit trust fund as a staple in building long-term wealth. He says there is also a need to change the short-term investor mindset.

Gan says while the current gloomy outlook may have impacted equity funds, not all can be lumped in the same boat. Funds like Islamic and money market are thriving and the factors that will ultimately attribute to industry growth is how well funds perform and deliver products that meet investor needs.

Areca Capital’s Wong expects the industry to continue growing at a double-digit rate. With investment markets getting more volatile, he says investors may find it harder to grow their investments resulting in migration of more funds into the fund management industry.

Competition from international players is the other main challenge for local players, he notes. To face the challenges, Wong adds innovativeness and excellent service standard is needed.

It is therefore important to allow different types of business models and strategies to combat that threat, especially when facing the establishedgiant international players, so that each player will continue its role and find its niche within the industry, he says.

Related Stories:
More cross-border investments
Investing in properties beyond our shores (right-waystan.blogspot.com)

Investing during turbulent times

Coins and banknotes

Tips on how to invest during turbulent times

STOCK markets around the world lately gave investors that sinking feeling again, weighed down by deepening woes of Europe’s sovereign debts, an anemic US economy and new fears of a sharp economic slowdown in China.

Many investors sold shares to hold more cash, despite cash earning very little interest. In Singapore for example, six months USD fixed deposits of less than US$1mil earns zero interest in some banks.

In the United States, 10-year Treasury bonds are yielding 2.1% per annum; despite misery returns, many investors prefer the safety of US Treasuries during crisis times, while waiting for policymakers to act boldly and markets to stabilise.

At the same time, we see many economists and other pundits offer a whole host of predictions about today’s global financial predicaments. The many predictions range from the slightly hopeful to the pessimistic, right down to the disastrous and absurd.

Does it sound familiar? Did we not hear many such predictions during the 2008/2009 global financial crisis? Who should we listen to? What should one do?

No doubt in hindsight, a few forecasts will be correct; and as the dust settles, many extreme predictions will also likely be forgotten. Yet for investors today, separating much of the “noise” from facts is one of the more tricky parts of steering through these very challenging times.

Fundamentals and valuation takes a back seat during a crisis

Volatile stock markets today are driven by latest positive or negative news flow affecting sentiment. Uncertainties during a crisis causes investment risks to spike, stock investors tend to sell first and ask questions later; fundamentals and stock valuation typically takes a back seat in the short term.

No doubt many investors worry about negative impact to a company’s fundamentals in difficult times. For example, a manufacturing company’s stock with a present price earning (PE) multiple of six times can change drastically to 60 times PE if earnings were to collapse 90% because of a global financial crisis.

Similarly, a property company’s price to book value discount of 60% can easily drop to 30% if asset value is marked down by half in troubled times. Monitoring, reassessments and analysis of a company’s financial progress is obviously important during tumultuous times.

Share prices of companies (even those with good fundamentals) may continue to fall indiscriminately, due to many reasons such as panic selling, fund redemption and repatriation. Investors should tread cautiously, even if stock prices may appear to be at very attractive levels.

I relate a challenging experience from the last global stock market plunge. In 2008, I invested in the largest luxury watch distributor and retailer in China (at that time 210 stores and sales amounting to 5.5 billion yuan a year or about 30% market share).

This Hong Kong listed Chinese company sells luxury watches (such as Omega, Longines, Bvlgari) from global brand owners Swatch group of Switzerland and LVMH of France (both by the way are also 9.1% and 6.3% shareholders of this Chinese company respectively).

As the US sub-prime mortgage crisis deepens by end-July 2008, many stocks around the world plunged. This company’s shares similarly dropped from HK$2 to HK$1.50 in a matter of weeks.

We vigorously reassessed the company’s fundamentals, including visits to retail outlets in China and Hong Kong. The result was an affirmation of our conviction to invest in the company for the long-term, despite short-term price weakness.

By late September 2008, we decided to purchase more shares when valuation proved so attractive at HK$1.15 per share (at a PE multiple of eight times).

Unfortunately, as the global financial crisis worsened, the company’s shares continued to plunge and bottomed to a low of HK$0.51 by Nov 26, 2008.

This stock eventually recovered back to HK$2 per share (by June 1, 2009) and went on to exceed HK$5 per share by late 2010. The company’s share prices recovered partly because Asian equities rebounded quickly in 2009, but also reached new highs because the company’s fundamentals continue to improve with strong sales (+49%), profitability (+26%) and expansions (+140 stores to 350 stores) from 2008 to 2010.

A lesson if you will that during a crisis, one should be prepared for short-term (weeks and months) stock market volatility.

It is essential for bargain hunters to have long-term holding power, good understanding of company fundamentals and strong conviction on a company’s prospect. In the long-term, we know fundamentals and valuation does matter.

How does one invest during a time of crisis?

My approaches to investing in turbulent times are:

  • Search for and invest (when valuations are attractive) in well managed companies that will not only survive but emerge stronger from crisis times;
  • Be prepared to stomach stock market volatility in the months ahead;
  • Have a longer term investment horizon (perhaps two to three years); once this crisis dissipates, reap the rewards as stock markets recover.

In Asia, macroeconomic fundamentals likely will remain resilient as many Asian economies have strong foreign currency reserves, coupled with more fiscal and monetary policy options to support growth.

China is also likely to withstand any fallout from Europe better than most would think. China’s economy is still growing at a strong 9.1% gross domestic product growth for the third quarter of 2011; speculations about China’s economy crashing may be somewhat premature at this stage.

Similarly, I think many established Asian companies have sufficient resources be it cash, borrowing powers or human capital, to emerge out of these turbulent times faster and stronger than before.

I believe with increasingly attractive valuation, the investing risk-reward equation (potential downside risk versus long term return prospects) favors Asian equities in the long run. I have confidence investing in Asia’s fundamentals and Asian companies for many more years ahead.

Teoh Kok Lin is the founder and chief investment officer of Singular Asset Management Sdn Bhd

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 95 other followers