They are disgraceful ! Will MAS call for another separate BOI ?
Take full responsibility ? Step down or compensate to those who are affected ? Talk is really cheap .
Aiyo... better don't be so cocky and iron teeth... wait u eat your own words then know... anyway, he so well paid plus FT sure no worries and can be so "strong" lah... his salary now is equivalent (bigger than) to many "unproductive" intermediaries and investors like us...
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/busi...08072.html
SGX CEO Mr Magnus Bocker said that he "would not give up" when asked if he would resign over the incident. He added that this was not the first time that he has faced such challenges, and that any renewal would be a negotiation between him and the board.
I spoke to a insti dealing head y'day and he continued to lament the removal of lunch breaks. He said that while there remains opportunities to swap lunch breaks with his dealers WHEN trading volume is low,it is impossible to go for lunches when trading picks up. Moreover, his lunches now even WHEN possible are stressful given the orders that continue to linger on his mind while they are being monitored during his absence.
Such inhumane robotic way of continuous trading adds the unnecessary stress on human beings. Mr Bocker is simply not understanding even though he has 30 years of experience. I personally thinks that while he is focusing on delivering the best possible outcomes for SGX holders, his "casino velocity" style approach is compromising on the quality of listings on SGX and hence depriving the investment public of choices.
As a disgraced SGX holder, no matter how small my position is, ironically is finding my investment horizon shrinking on SGX. I have to thank most of the rubbish that is being floated for the shrinkage since I simply can't bring myself forward to diversify. I have to diversify geographically - not by choice really but that means leakages from Singapore shores.
While many may think that SGX is doing well on derivatives and non-equities businesses, admittedly this portion of the business being the former SIMEX activities are not visible at least from the equities perspective.
Overall, the recent problems should not be viewed as one-offs. I don't remembering having so much problems prior to 2007 and hence old days may be simpler than now, more happier days for everyone...
If the time for Remedy Action is not now, can someone tell me When should it be... after SMRT and the various congested related problems in "efficient" Singapore, the last we need is to have another falling iCON on a niche market where only fewer and fewer participants remain.
Disgraced concern
GG
NEWS ANALYSIS
More than words needed to reassure SGX investors
Fund managers may lose confidence in local stocks with frequent disruptions
Published on Dec 4, 2014 12:59 AM
By Yasmine Yahya Assistant Money Editor
SINGAPORE Exchange (SGX) chief executive Magnus Bocker came out swinging at an hour- long press conference yesterday, explaining in painstaking detail what happened in the bourse operator's latest "incident", what it plans to do next, addressing whether he would step down from his job and apologising for good measure.
It was a marked change from the last hastily convened press conference held by the SGX to explain a three-hour market disruption last month. Mr Bocker did not even show up then.
The public relations offensive made clear that the SGX is keenly aware yesterday's market opening delay was the bourse operator's third strike and some investors feel Mr Bocker should be out.
Aside from last month's disruption, the SGX had to suspend derivatives trading for over two hours on April 1 due to a hardware fault.
Yesterday, Mr Bocker put his game face on. While acknowledging an unfortunate run of technical glitches and market disruptions this year, he managed to put a positive spin on things.
The way that the SGX handled yesterday's situation is a signal that it is willing to take a hit to support retail investors and this should thus strengthen long-term confidence and trust in the SGX, he said.
Would Mr Bocker consider resigning, given public furore over the series of market disruptions?
"I'm not giving up," was the stoic reply. "I've been working with exchanges for nearly 30 years and this is not the first time I've gone through this. We will come through."
Is his contract likely to be renewed next year?
"This is something between me and my board... I really appreciate working with the SGX. We have a phenomenal journey for this company, which I think is one of the most interesting exchange companies in the world."
Bold words for a firm in the midst of its most heated public relations crisis in years.
But it will take more than words to calm angry investors, who took to online forums yesterday to vent their frustration, calling for Mr Bocker's resignation - or for his bonus and pay to be slashed at the least - and urging regulators to penalise the SGX.
Listed companies and fund managers, too, are losing confidence in the Singapore market, noted NRA Capital executive chairman Kevin Scully.
"I spoke to the chief financial officer of a listed firm and he said he was not even told about the opening delay ahead of time. It makes you question whether they have a proper disaster recovery system in place," he said.
The SGX issued a public statement about the delay on its website at 4am yesterday morning.
International fund managers who see such frequent disruptions here may be less confident in investing in local stocks too, and might demand cheaper valuations in the face of that risk.
Call it bad luck or mismanagement, but the SGX's woes have far-reaching consequences that affect not only local investors' confidence in the market but also Singapore's reputation as a regional financial hub.
The SGX has promised full reviews and investigations to prevent further disruptions. Regulators have said they will take action "if necessary".
The market is certainly waiting to see what will happen next, beyond the offering of promises and threats.
yasminey@sph.com.sg
Related Links
application/pdf iconWHAT HAPPENED
Background story
TRADING DISRUPTIONS ON SINGAPORE EXCHANGE
Dec 3, 2014
Software glitch; length of disruption: 31/2 hours
Nov 5, 2014
Power supply issues; more than three hours
April 1, 2014
Hardware trouble; more than three hours
April 9, 2013
Technical glitch; three hours
Feb 5, 2007
Technical glitch; more than three hours
Why should he resign when he can continue to draw fat salary and talk unreasonably ? He is just emulating some guys.
Fat salary?...Hmm I read somewhere that the salary of SGX CEO is higher than that of HKEX CEO? Is that true? If so, I must say I am very surprised. Based on the latest annual report, Magnus Bocker's total gross remuneration comes up to $3,783,137. His top 5 lieutanants draw $990k-$1.7m.
On a side note, I don't think Magnus Bocker should take the full blame. Some of his IT folks should as well.
Must pay top salaries for top talents ! So far what has he created or added values to SGX , besides doing away the lunch hours ?
(04-12-2014, 07:53 AM)greengiraffe Wrote: [ -> ]I spoke to a insti dealing head y'day and he continued to lament the removal of lunch breaks. He said that while there remains opportunities to swap lunch breaks with his dealers WHEN trading volume is low,it is impossible to go for lunches when trading picks up. Moreover, his lunches now even WHEN possible are stressful given the orders that continue to linger on his mind while they are being monitored during his absence.
Such inhumane robotic way of continuous trading adds the unnecessary stress on human beings. Mr Bocker is simply not understanding even though he has 30 years of experience. I personally thinks that while he is focusing on delivering the best possible outcomes for SGX holders, his "casino velocity" style approach is compromising on the quality of listings on SGX and hence depriving the investment public of choices.
FYI, your favorite exchange ASX doesn't has the lunch break too. Base on your observation, do the ASX brokers complain the same? Americans are the most human-right conscious, but I didn't see any obvious complains on their no-lunch-break in NYSE, base on my limited exposure with them...
They must be reasons that make SGX brokers feel the no-lunch-break unbearable, under Singapore environment. May be the worth to find out more...
Hi CF,
ASX has shorter trading hours - 10am to 4pm - 2 hours shorter than SGX... 2 hours can have coffee and afternoon tea...
Anyway, why is so difficult to have 1 hour break - HKSE also have that shortened lunch hour...
Break time is just an example... If the exchange listing quality is good, even opened from 1030 - 1530 with 1.5 hours lunch break - trading liquidity will be there. In fact when trading was half day y'day, my insti buddy's said that trading value and volume is only 10 - 15% less - what a reality.
No need to defend high paying excuse finding folks... if he is so good, he should have no problems finding another job on other exchanges... in fact, if he is so good, he should be part of VB, doing his own investments and contribute his value ideas rather than keep finding casino ideas to increase velocity that makes investors poorer over time...
GG
(04-12-2014, 10:14 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ] (04-12-2014, 07:53 AM)greengiraffe Wrote: [ -> ]I spoke to a insti dealing head y'day and he continued to lament the removal of lunch breaks. He said that while there remains opportunities to swap lunch breaks with his dealers WHEN trading volume is low,it is impossible to go for lunches when trading picks up. Moreover, his lunches now even WHEN possible are stressful given the orders that continue to linger on his mind while they are being monitored during his absence.
Such inhumane robotic way of continuous trading adds the unnecessary stress on human beings. Mr Bocker is simply not understanding even though he has 30 years of experience. I personally thinks that while he is focusing on delivering the best possible outcomes for SGX holders, his "casino velocity" style approach is compromising on the quality of listings on SGX and hence depriving the investment public of choices.
FYI, your favorite exchange ASX doesn't has the lunch break too. Base on your observation, do the ASX brokers complain the same? Americans are the most human-right conscious, but I didn't see any obvious complains on their no-lunch-break in NYSE, base on my limited exposure with them...
They must be reasons that make SGX brokers feel the no-lunch-break unbearable, under Singapore environment. May be the worth to find out more...
(04-12-2014, 10:14 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ] (04-12-2014, 07:53 AM)greengiraffe Wrote: [ -> ]I spoke to a insti dealing head y'day and he continued to lament the removal of lunch breaks. He said that while there remains opportunities to swap lunch breaks with his dealers WHEN trading volume is low,it is impossible to go for lunches when trading picks up. Moreover, his lunches now even WHEN possible are stressful given the orders that continue to linger on his mind while they are being monitored during his absence.
Such inhumane robotic way of continuous trading adds the unnecessary stress on human beings. Mr Bocker is simply not understanding even though he has 30 years of experience. I personally thinks that while he is focusing on delivering the best possible outcomes for SGX holders, his "casino velocity" style approach is compromising on the quality of listings on SGX and hence depriving the investment public of choices.
FYI, your favorite exchange ASX doesn't has the lunch break too. Base on your observation, do the ASX brokers complain the same? Americans are the most human-right conscious, but I didn't see any obvious complains on their no-lunch-break in NYSE, base on my limited exposure with them...
They must be reasons that make SGX brokers feel the no-lunch-break unbearable, under Singapore environment. May be the worth to find out more...
Many remisiers are having their own lunch, tea and nap breaks
most of the time, or beating flies if there is .
Hi GG,
I agree with you no point to defend someone I don't know personally. I do see a point to present balance view on a particular issue
If the lunch break is an example for your points on SGX's "faults". May be it is not a good example, as majority of the exchanges have no lunch break.
If every "good" one are doing value investing, and none to work as good management in listed companies, than may be no more good company for VB to invest in liao...
(non core vested in SGX, and might be biased)
(04-12-2014, 10:32 AM)greengiraffe Wrote: [ -> ]Hi CF,
ASX has shorter trading hours - 10am to 4pm - 2 hours shorter than SGX... 2 hours can have coffee and afternoon tea...
Anyway, why is so difficult to have 1 hour break - HKSE also have that shortened lunch hour...
Break time is just an example... If the exchange listing quality is good, even opened from 1030 - 1530 with 1.5 hours lunch break - trading liquidity will be there. In fact when trading was half day y'day, my insti buddy's said that trading value and volume is only 10 - 15% less - what a reality.
No need to defend high paying excuse finding folks... if he is so good, he should have no problems finding another job on other exchanges... in fact, if he is so good, he should be part of VB, doing his own investments and contribute his value ideas rather than keep finding casino ideas to increase velocity that makes investors poorer over time...
GG