I appreciate and thank Mr. Magnus Bocker for his contributions since 2009. The few committees installed are helpful to improve the quality and regulation of listings IMO, among other useful measures.
Thank you
Looking forward to see the next CEO...
(from a shareholder, and also a SGX investor)
SGX's CEO is leaving. - Has any Value-Buddies applied for the Post?
I honestly don't know why people blame Magnus Bocker for so many things. In my opinion, I think a lot of the things that happened during his term as CEO could very well have happened under the previous CEOs such as the IT Outages, Penny Stock Saga and Low Volumes.
Some of those remisiers in my view are a whiny lot who refuse to innovate and just hope to continue with the good old days sit back at their desks take phone calls, go for lunch break and make fat commissions. There was a letter in Forum of Straits Times today regarding the lunch break issue and I totally agree with the writer. Remisiers need to think of ways to provide value add for their customers in this day and age when everyone is moving towards internet trading.
And why did no one complain about former CEO Hsieh Fu Hua? He was just lucky that he was CEO during the era when all stocks with the word "China" would turn to Gold. After the fat bonuses have been paid out and the Gold has turned to Poo, who is left to suffer and clear up the mess?
End of the day I am not saying Magnus Bocker is finest CEO that SGX has had but I also do think that he has been unfairly blasted for a lot of things.
SGX share price closed slightly lower today, after the announcement of CEO no renewal of contract. Mr. Market is muted by the news. I reckon SGX has reached a milestone with Mr. Magnus Bocker, good timing for closure of a chapter, IMO
(vested)
(25-02-2015, 04:44 PM)sgpunter Wrote: [ -> ]I honestly don't know why people blame Magnus Bocker for so many things. In my opinion, I think a lot of the things that happened during his term as CEO could very well have happened under the previous CEOs such as the IT Outages, Penny Stock Saga and Low Volumes.
Some of those remisiers in my view are a whiny lot who refuse to innovate and just hope to continue with the good old days sit back at their desks take phone calls, go for lunch break and make fat commissions. There was a letter in Forum of Straits Times today regarding the lunch break issue and I totally agree with the writer. Remisiers need to think of ways to provide value add for their customers in this day and age when everyone is moving towards internet trading.
And why did no one complain about former CEO Hsieh Fu Hua? He was just lucky that he was CEO during the era when all stocks with the word "China" would turn to Gold. After the fat bonuses have been paid out and the Gold has turned to Poo, who is left to suffer and clear up the mess?
End of the day I am not saying Magnus Bocker is finest CEO that SGX has had but I also do think that he has been unfairly blasted for a lot of things.
I agree. It is so easy and convenient to just put all the blame on Bocker, when such things can happen to any CEO in charge. Beside, many things are not within his control. I am taking this as an excuse or maybe I should say opportunity, to lock in profit and reduced my holding this morning. With his departure, regardless if one thinks he is good or bad, SGX now has a new uncertainty.
(25-02-2015, 09:19 PM)Ben Wrote: [ -> ] (25-02-2015, 04:44 PM)sgpunter Wrote: [ -> ]I honestly don't know why people blame Magnus Bocker for so many things. In my opinion, I think a lot of the things that happened during his term as CEO could very well have happened under the previous CEOs such as the IT Outages, Penny Stock Saga and Low Volumes.
Some of those remisiers in my view are a whiny lot who refuse to innovate and just hope to continue with the good old days sit back at their desks take phone calls, go for lunch break and make fat commissions. There was a letter in Forum of Straits Times today regarding the lunch break issue and I totally agree with the writer. Remisiers need to think of ways to provide value add for their customers in this day and age when everyone is moving towards internet trading.
And why did no one complain about former CEO Hsieh Fu Hua? He was just lucky that he was CEO during the era when all stocks with the word "China" would turn to Gold. After the fat bonuses have been paid out and the Gold has turned to Poo, who is left to suffer and clear up the mess?
End of the day I am not saying Magnus Bocker is finest CEO that SGX has had but I also do think that he has been unfairly blasted for a lot of things.
I agree. It is so easy and convenient to just put all the blame on Bocker, when such things can happen to any CEO in charge. Beside, many things are not within his control. I am taking this as an excuse or maybe I should say opportunity, to lock in profit and reduced my holding this morning. With his departure, regardless if one thinks he is good or bad, SGX now has a new uncertainty.
Sorry I cant agree... The reason you dun blame Bocker is simple, you are NOT a professional player or you do not trade big enough (I am talking about millions per day not 10k or sth). Therefore, the SGX trading volume does not really concern u that much. What happened to you even Singapore equity volume shrink to half? I dun think there is much effect. But for those remisers, their all income is depended on the market volume, they got families to feed, you will think much differently if you put your shoes into theirs (wat will u think if your salary is cut to half?).
And for the lunch break, as a retail investor, of course you dun feel anything different, but to those remisiers, some of them dun even have time to go lunch when they have big position or orders coming in, that is a totally different thing. So, try not be 坐着说话不腰疼，cos you r not the who is starving.
Now, let's talk about Bocker. In a SGX shareholder's view, I really dun have much to complain, SGX' result and the development of derivatives market speak everything. But, SGX is not simply a investment company，It is also the regulator of the exchange, that is where all the problem came from :conflicts of interests. Many of the measures imposed by Bocker to the equity market either sacrifises the long term wellness of the Singapore equity market for a short term profit for the group or have a very severe negative side effect on market volume. (e.g, lunchtime, minimun spread, clearing fee cap, minimun stick price, market maker etc...)I dun really want go into the details, that will take pages to illustrate. But u can simply see from 6 years STI volume chart, it is almost a 6 years straight down trendline. It is not a coincidence and I will say for the Singapore equity market, Bocker have to take 100% of the responsibility for the volume drop.
Lanina, very oddly, upon reading your post, I got reminded of an old Guinness stout ad where George Lam mentioned "Some people tell you to change yourself to suit the environment’, then followed by, ‘Why not change the environment to suit yourself".
Anyhow, regarding your point on families to feed and salaries being cut by half, I never like to see my fellow Singaporeans suffer but that is the reality of work/life today. Things move very fast and companies don't owe anything to any of their employees and vice versa. Sad but true. My best bud just lost his banking job and I also had quite a number of colleagues who were similarly retrenched when their jobs were moved to low cost locations like Poland and India. I do empathize with them. Thing is the smart ones don't sit around blaming their CEO, company, industry or the Singapore government but rather, they examine themselves to see where they can improve themselves be it via innovation or learning new skill sets and move on.
Regarding lunch break, rather than look at it in the light of "oh i don't time for lunch because I have big positions of orders coming in from clients", why not look at it from the perspective of a fellow remisier who is so free because he has no business and has all the time in the world for lunch when all he wants is just for his phone to ring? Which position would you rather be in? Thing is don't always see the downside of things but miss the upside which may not be so visible.
I'm not quite sure how the issue of conflict of interest is the root of all problems as you mentioned. SGX is tightly regulated by MAS to ensure that there are no such conflict of interests between its role as a regulator and profit generator so if you think this dual hat role is to be blamed for everything, why not blame MAS? As far as I know, there are many controls put in place to ensure that the regulatory unit/s of SGX are not conflicted with the business units of SGX.
The fact that you mentioned that Bocker has to take 100% of responsibility for the volume drop suggests that you have not looked at the bigger picture. Singapore is not like Hong Kong where it has its Godfather (China) to take care of it and our domestic market is small. There is so much one man can do and there are more headwinds than you can imagine. Conveniently blaming every damn thing on Bocker is not justified in my opinion. So, try not be 坐着说话不腰疼 and point fingers as you are not the one in the hot seat.
Note: I am no supporter of Bocker. Just a neutral bystander expressing my own individual opinion
Do you guys feels that the market becoming more volatile since the 1 lots=100 shares started?
(26-02-2015, 10:54 AM)GPD Wrote: [ -> ]Do you guys feels that the market becoming more volatile since the 1 lots=100 shares started?
Not really... I think the volatility is due to global economic news more than anything else.
They'll need to remove minimum commissions across the board for brokerages. The corresponding increase in volume should more than make up for the additional work load for the brokers.
(26-02-2015, 11:13 AM)piggo Wrote: [ -> ] (26-02-2015, 10:54 AM)GPD Wrote: [ -> ]Do you guys feels that the market becoming more volatile since the 1 lots=100 shares started?
Not really... I think the volatility is due to global economic news more than anything else.
They'll need to remove minimum commissions across the board for brokerages. The corresponding increase in volume should more than make up for the additional work load for the brokers.
Agree! Please remove the minimum commissions...