SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: arun gera who wrote (161712)8/25/2020 8:02:33 PM
From: TobagoJack  Respond to of 218441
 
<<Inflation? How much? Where?>> in China and Australia, for example, of Mengniu and of Kirin, respectively

and officialdom interference accelerating the trending



bloomberg.com

Is Your Morning OJ a Matter of National Security?China Mengniu Dairy is walking away from its bid for Kirin’s Australian beverages business amid political stonewalling.
David Fickling25 August 2020, 13:08 GMT+8



Where there’s trouble brewing.

Photographer: Carla Gottgens/Bloomberg

David Fickling is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering commodities, as well as industrial and consumer companies. He has been a reporter for Bloomberg News, Dow Jones, the Wall Street Journal, the Financial Times and the Guardian.
Read more opinion Follow @davidfickling on Twitter

LISTEN TO ARTICLE
If you wanted to examine whether heightened international scrutiny of outbound Chinese investments is about knee-jerk xenophobia as much as legitimate national security concerns, you could do worse than look at events in Australia.

China Mengniu Dairy Co. and Kirin Holdings Co. will terminate the planned sale of Kirin’s Australian beverages business Lion Dairy & Drinks Pty., the companies said Tuesday. Eight months after the $A600 million ($430.4 million) sale was announced, foreign investment approval has still not been granted “and is unlikely to be forthcoming,” Kirin said in a statement.

It’s hard to comprehend a sensible rationale behind blocking this deal.

Lion has been foreign-owned since Japan’s Kirin took it over more than a decade ago. Mengniu isn’t a state-owned enterprise, and even if it was, pinpointing what genuine issues could crop up around Lion’s core business of producing milk, juice and beer stretches the imagination. Just 10 days before the Lion bid was announced last November, Australian Treasurer Josh Frydenberg signed off on Mengniu’s A$1.28 billion takeover of Bellamy’s Australia Ltd., a maker of organic infant formula.

Sour Milk
The paths of Mengniu and Kirin have diverged since the Japanese company promised to sell its Lion beverages business last November
Source: Bloomberg
Note: Rebased. Nov. 25, 2019=100.

For its part, Beijing hasn’t always been wide open to foreign beverage takeovers, blocking Coca-Cola Co.’s 2009 bid for a local juice company on antitrust grounds. China antagonized Australia’s drinks industry with a patently absurd anti-dumping investigation of the country’s winemakers just last week.

Even so, China’s beverages industry is hardly closed off to external investment. Its breweries have long been fought over by foreign companies including SABMiller Plc, Asahi Group Holdings Ltd. and Heineken NV. Mengniu itself counts France's Danone SA and Denmark's Arla Foods Amba as major shareholders.

More to the point, trade and investment diplomacy isn’t meant to be playground tit-for-tat, where Canberra punishes Kirin and Mengniu because Beijing was mean to Australia’s wine industry. If a Chinese company buying Lion from a Japanese company is a threat to the national interest (the vaguely defined core of Australia’s foreign-investment approvals regime), the government should articulate its reasons.

That’s not happening. Though Frydenberg has the final say in foreign investment approvals, he hasn’t followed the usual practice of announcing and explaining his decision. Instead he’s just drawn things out long enough that the parties themselves have walked away. (In an email to Bloomberg News after Tuesday’s announcement, he said he’d previously told Mengniu the deal “would be contrary to the national interest” but didn’t elaborate further.)

Given the dismal history of China’s outbound takeovers, the country’s executives might consider this more restrictive atmosphere a blessing in disguise. Fosun International Ltd. may see its investment in Cirque de Soleil wiped out, and investments in U.K. restaurant chain PizzaExpress and baggage handler Swissport International AG have similarly turned sour, Manuel Baigorri of Bloomberg News reported this week.

Still, this is no way for Australia to attract foreign investors — something the country should be taking more seriously, given it has recently started running capital account deficits for the first time since the 1970s. Kirin is now stuck with a business it doesn’t want and its future will be “re-examined,” the Japanese company said Tuesday. If Mengniu, one of the world’s biggest dairy businesses, thinks it can make a better play of things but gets blocked due to politics, employees only have Frydenberg to thank if they find their jobs restructured out of existence.

Life Out of Balance
Australia's capital account is running deficits for the first time since the 1970s
Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics
Note: Figures show the combined capital and financial account.

The unspoken backdrop to all this is the likelihood that a similar deal would have been waved through if the buyer weren’t Chinese. Diplomatic relations between Canberra and Beijing are already strained, and Asian Australians have reported hundreds of cases of racial abuse in recent months. Prime Minister Scott Morrison has been at pains to stress that whatever justified issues Australia may have with the Chinese government, it will support Chinese people and Chinese Australians.

At such a time, it’s doubly important that politicians draw a bright line between foreign investment bars based on solid national security grounds, and a broad-brush objection to all money coming out of China. If that hasn’t been done, even more legitimate restrictions will end up carrying the taint of prejudice.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

To contact the author of this story:
David Fickling at dfickling@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story:
Rachel Rosenthal at rrosenthal21@bloomberg.net

Before it's here, it's on the Bloomberg Terminal.
LEARN MORE



To: arun gera who wrote (161712)8/25/2020 8:07:22 PM
From: TobagoJack  Respond to of 218441
 
<<Inflation? How much? Where?>>

another guess, Inflation, by Ericsson / Nokia, in India Telecom generally, and 5G in particular, forestalling industry 4.0 / IoT enhancement, for now

ft.com

India moves to cut Huawei gear from telecoms networkIndustry executives say government is seeking to phase out Chinese equipment without a formal ban
yesterday
Huawei executives at the launch of their Y9 smartphone in New Delhi © Jyoti Kapoor/Pacific Press/Zuma/PAIndia is phasing out equipment from Huawei and other Chinese companies from its telecoms networks over an escalating border dispute, striking a fresh blow to the beleaguered technology giant in one of its most important markets.

New Delhi has not issued any formal written ban on Chinese equipment suppliers such as Huawei and ZTE, nor has Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government made any such public pronouncements.

However, industry executives and government officials say key ministries have clearly indicated that local telecoms service providers should avoid using Chinese equipment in future investments, including in 5G networks.

“It’s open now that the government is not going to allow Chinese equipment,” a telecoms industry executive told the FT. “There is now clarity?.?.?.?It’s really game over.”

India’s telecoms department, the executive added, “has already disallowed 5G testing with Chinese vendors”.

Huawei has been one of the three biggest telecoms equipment suppliers in India, which is the world’s second biggest mobile market, with more than 850m users. It has had significant contracts with Bharti Airtel, Vodafone and state-owned BSNL.

New Delhi was unlikely to ever formally ban Huawei or other Chinese equipment companies lest it provoked a tough response from Beijing, a senior government official told the FT.

But the official said Mr Modi’s administration was highly wary about Chinese investment in sensitive infrastructure. The two nuclear-armed neighbours currently have tens of thousands of soldiers massed along their disputed border high on the Tibetan plateau, after a deadly brawl that left at least 20 Indian soldiers dead.

Indian Border Security Force soldiers guard a highway leading towards the Himalayan town of Leh along the border with China, © Tauseef Mustafa/AFP/Getty “The thinking is: ‘Let’s do tough rather than talk tough,’” the official told the FT. “We don’t want to make life miserable for consumers. But when it comes to big public contracts and critical infrastructure, we would prefer non-Chinese companies. That message has gotten through to Indian business.”

New Delhi’s informal boycott comes as Huawei is under growing political pressure in western countries from the UK to Australia, where it has been banned from providing 5G kit amid concerns it could allow Beijing to hack into countries’ power grids and other critical infrastructure.

Anti-China sentiment in India has grown since June’s border dispute, after which New Delhi banned TikTok along with 58 other apps, citing national security concerns.

“India’s government is yet to issue an official diktat against Huawei and is playing wait and watch,” said Sanchit Vir Gogia, chief analyst of Greyhound Research. “Irrespective, the intent is evident — that of not being welcoming to Huawei.”

Mr Gogia said Huawei’s exclusion from upcoming 5G trials would be a blow to both Bharti Airtel and Vodafone’s struggling Indian arm as it would lead to them incurring higher costs. It would, however, open opportunities for Huawei’s rivals Nokia, Ericsson and Samsung, he said.

A Jio store in Kolkata, India © Indranil Aditya/NurPhoto/Getty India’s largest telecoms operator Reliance Jio, owned by Asia’s richest man Mukesh Ambani, does not have Chinese equipment in its networks, and has pledged to develop its own 5G equipment, though analysts are sceptical.

It has also sold stakes to a raft of high-profile US companies including Google and Facebook.

Jio’s main rival Bharti Airtel — which traditionally relied heavily on Huawei — announced a new tie-up with US-based Verizon in August.

Recommended





Bharti Airtel “will try to be in the government’s good books with this anti-China sentiment”, said Neil Shah, a telecoms industry analyst at consultancy Counterpoint Research. “BSNL — India’s state-owned telecoms company — is shutting out Chinese vendors, definitely Huawei is in limbo. At Airtel they are almost shut out.”

Vodafone, India’s third-largest telecoms player, is the most dependent on Chinese equipment but its survival is in doubt as a result of a long-running dispute over retrospective levies and penalties worth billions of dollars.

Huawei refused to comment on its India business, but said in a recent statement that “reports suggesting lay-offs of more than half of Huawei staff in India are untrue”.

Why India is reconsidering its attitude towards China




To: arun gera who wrote (161712)8/25/2020 8:14:29 PM
From: TobagoJack  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 218441
 
<< Inflation? How much? Where? >>

Inflation:
- fewer regional jets required from Boeing & Airbus, driving up unit cost
- more tourism along the rails, and more fresh goods trade for the connected dots
- etc etc

Deflation:
- regional jet pricing
- etc etc

bloomberg.com

Thailand Turns to Faster Road and Rail Spending to Prop Up Economy

Randy Thanthong-Knight

Thailand’s Transport Ministry plans to accelerate spending on roads and rail projects in the fiscal year starting in October to aid an economy hammered by a slump in exports and tourism.

Key programs include expansion of Bangkok’s mass-transit network and expressways linking several nearby provinces and the nation’s eastern seaboard to Bangkok, as about half of Thailand’s gross domestic product comes from the capital city though it has less than a 10th of the nation’s population.

Also high on the government’s transport agenda is a highway network connecting neighboring countries and a high-speed rail that goes through neighboring countries to China.

“I’m trying to expedite budget disbursement because government spending can generate a chain reaction that increases economic activities,” Transport Minister Saksiam Chidchob said in an interview.



Funds will be a combination of the ministry’s annual budget allocation from the central government, revenue from state enterprises and income from various funds, Saksiam said. The transport budget in the new fiscal year will be 232 billion baht ($7.4 billion), up about 32% from the current period.

One key is to actually spend the money, Saksiam said. The disbursement rate for the investment portion of the government’s overall budget this fiscal year through mid-July was just 37%, according to the Finance Ministry. Specific figures for the Transport Ministry weren’t available.

Even before Covid-19, infrastructure spending was typically delayed by political wrangling and personnel changes. About 70% of the government’s investment budget was used in fiscal 2019, according to the Finance Ministry.

Fund Disbursement“Disbursement has declined in recent years,” according to Tim Leelahaphan, an economist at Standard Chartered Pcl in Bangkok. “And the government now appears focused on providing a short-term boost to the economy via private consumption rather than investment revival.”

Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-Ocha reshuffled his Cabinet lineup this month. Though Saksiam kept his job at the Transport Ministry, Predee Daochai was appointed finance minister and Supattanapong Punmeechaow was named deputy premier in charge of the economy -- a role that oversees many large infrastructure projects.

Read: Bangkok Looks to Clear Polluted Skies With Massive Rail Project

Among the most ambitious efforts is the Eastern Economic Corridor, a favorite of former Deputy Premier Somkid Jatusripitak. The EEC is a highly industrialized area near Bangkok that has been promoted by the government as the key area for investment in industries such as automotive, robotics, logistics, health care and medical tourism.

”We do not see a clear post-Covid development strategy for Thailand,” Standard Chartered’s Tim said. “Measures such as the redevelopment of the EEC and some various other mega projects were started under Somkid. It remains to be seen whether these projects will be continued.”

Before it's here, it's on the Bloomberg Terminal.
LEARN MORE




To: arun gera who wrote (161712)8/26/2020 7:08:53 AM
From: THE ANT3 Recommendations

Recommended By
elmatador
pak73
Pogeu Mahone

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 218441
 
Brazil tried that back in 90s. The elite and their minions (unions, government workers, press, teachers, state banks) had their wages tied to inflation. When the population kept growing but the economic pie did not, they kept up with inflation but let the 80% receiving one minimum wage go from $400 a month to $40 a month with inflation at 35% a month. I was sitting in Rio at a beach front café reading the paper. It said "wake up Brazil we are in a civil war. More people are dying on the streets of Brazil than Yugoslavia" Well the elites who were quite happy with the situation until the realized that even they were threatened by the situation and put Fernando Henrique into power. Within one year minimum wage was $80 a month and inflation 0. The next 20 years were spent transferring more money (Lula) to the minimum wage people. The government let corruption run wild and followed socialist policies (Democratic party) and eventually they were taking so many taxes from the small productive group that everyone lost. Bolsonaro is the pendulum swinging back. Like the US elite the Brazilian elite have continued to live like kings and don't give a shit, as long as the arraignment is stable and they remain in power. See any similarities with the US system?



To: arun gera who wrote (161712)8/26/2020 1:33:53 PM
From: Pogeu Mahone  Respond to of 218441
 
Small Landlords, Tenants, Lenders, Governments Grapple with “Extend-and-Pretend Forevermore”

by Nick Corbishley • Aug 26, 2020 • 9 Comments
Most of the fallout from the Pandemic has been postponed in the UK. But then what?



By Nick Corbishley, for WOLF STREET:

The British public was recently treated to an exemplary example of what Wolf Street likes to call “ extend and pretend forevermore.” At the end of last week, the UK government extended its ban on tenant evictions by four extra weeks. First launched in late March, the ban was supposed to last three months, but it was extended by an additional two months in June. Now, it’s been extended til late September.

In other words, tenants will have been safe from legal eviction for six months so far this year. The government also lengthened the minimum period of notice a landlord has to give before evicting a tenant from two months to six months.

Extending the eviction ban and the notice period offers a lifeline of sorts for tenants who are unable to pay their rent in the wake of the lockdown. Their landlords cannot evict them but the rent is still owed. And while extending the ban and the notice period may remove the immediate threat of eviction, in many cases all it really does is postpone the inevitable while shifting the locus of immediate financial stress from the tenants to the property owners. And the property owners are not happy.

“While the announcement could be seen as good news for tenants as it gives them the security of having a home, especially during a time when so many have been effected by the financial impact of the pandemic, it begs the question – what about the landlord?” asks Paul Offley,?Compliance Officer at The Guild of Property Professionals.

In some cases,?Offley warns, it could take far longer than six months for landlords to complete the eviction process, particularly if the tenant decides to stay on even after the eviction period has lapsed. During the notice period, landlords?may no longer qualify for forbearance — or as Brits breezily call it, a mortgage holiday — which is scheduled to come to an end in late October, though it too could be extended. During the six-month period landlords will still be legally bound by Health and Safety regulations pertaining to their property, even if they have no rental income coming in to pay for repairs.

How many landlords are in this situation?Two million people in the UK — roughly one in 33 people — currently own homes they rent out. The vast majority of them are small buy-to-let landlords with one or two properties. Many have mortgages to service on the properties they own.

For over three decades the UK witnessed a huge buy-to-let boom, as investors and pensioners took advantage of favorable tax conditions to play the property market. After the GFC, as interest rates fell and yields on conservative investment products such as UK gilts gradually disappeared, more and more money flowed into property. Then, three years ago, the government reversed policy amid concerns that buy-to-let landlords were crowding out first time buyers: little by little, the tax conditions became less favorable, prompting many landlords to sell up. The boom ended.

Now, some of those who didn’t sell up face the risk of not being paid by their tenants. According to a poll of 1,058 private renters in England conducted by YouGov for the homeless charity Shelter, the number of renters in arrears has almost doubled since lockdown, from around 226,000 to around 442,000 — over 5% of the country’s 8.7 million renters.

A recent poll by the National Residential Landlords Association (NRLA) suggests the number could be higher: 87% of the landlords surveyed said their private tenants had paid their rent as normal throughout the pandemic so far. An additional 8% said they had agreed a reduced rent, a rent-free period, or made some other agreement with their tenant. The remaining 5% of tenants are behind on their rent without the consent of their landlords. In other words, according to the NLRA, 13% of tenants in the UK are not paying their full rent.

In the UK, like much of Europe, most of the fallout from the Pandemic has been postponed, thanks primarily to the government’s furlough scheme, which has kept 9.6 million jobs on life support. Businesses have been able to claim 80% of a staff member’s regular monthly salary, up to a maximum of £2,500. The money is passed on to the employee and can also be topped up by the employer.

Many furloughed workers have continued to earn the lion’s share of their salary despite the fact they’re not working. This has allowed many of them to continue making their rent payments. But that may not last much longer. The government has already begun scaling back the furlough program’s provisions and is scheduled to scrap it altogether at the end of October. Unlike most of its European counterparts, it says it sees little sense in keeping workers in so-called “unproductive jobs” any longer than strictly necessary.

The government could execute another last minute U-turn, but if it doesn’t — and my guess is that this time it won’t — unemployment will quickly soar, much like it did in the U.S. in the early days of the Pandemic. Businesses that can no longer afford to pay their staff or lay them off will hit the wall. And the real upheaval in the rental market will start, as more tenants stop paying their rent, quite possibly at the same time that their landlords’ mortgage holidays end.

Landlords are edgy. Some are calling for the government to directly bail out renters so that the renters can then bail them out. In Wales, an even more ingenious scheme has been hatched: the government essentially gives struggling private sector tenants that have arrears dating back to the Pandemic a loan so that they can pay their landlords the arrears they owe. The taxpayer funds go directly to the landlords, who are made whole, while the struggling tenants get to take on thousands of pounds of fresh debt.

The plan, scheduled to kick off next week, has already drawn plaudits from landlords and real estate agencies in England, who are clamoring for much of the some across the border.

“A loan system of the type operating in Wales will help to protect tenants by ensuring they can continue to pay rent and reduce the risk of evictions,” said Dorian Gonsalves, chief executive of the residential property lettings agency Belvoir. “In the long term a loan system to subsidize the rental market and protect tenants may ultimately be less costly for the government than a potential increase in homelessness, especially as councils will struggle to rehome people due to a shortage in social housing.”

But before landlords in Wales and England get ahead of themselves, they might want to consider that a very similar scheme was launched four months ago in Spain, where rental delinquencies are a much bigger problem, and it’s been a complete flop. Just 1.3% of tenants have shown an interest in applying for the government-backed loans — a fraction of the estimated 15% of tenants who are no longer paying rent.

In most cases, the reason is simple: having lost their job or business and facing the bleakest economic panorama of their lifetime, tenants are struggling to see the point of taking on piles of fresh debt to pay months of rental arrears when they can’t even rustle up today’s rent. Not everyone, it seems, wants to play the extend and pretend forevermore game. By Nick Corbishley, for WOLF STREET.

Enjoy reading WOLF STREET and want to support it? Using ad blockers – I totally get why – but want to support the site? You can donate. I appreciate it immensely. Click on the beer and iced-tea mug to find out how: