Alice Cheong

According to StraitsTimes, ERA has been ordered by High Court to pay $257k and other expenses to a married couple whose property agent had acted in conflict of interest.

The points of contest are
(1) the property “A” was 1st sold for $688,000 ($7818psm), and within 2 weeks was resold for $945,000 (10739psm).
(2) the property “A” was 1st sold to the wife of the boss of the agent.
And the conclusion was that, it is a conflict of interest.

Now, imagine this scenerio*,
(1) the property “A” is sold at $7818psm in July 07, and
(2) the only sales in 07, which was it’s immediate next door neighbor, was sold at $7237psm in May 07, which is just 2 months earlier.
(3) Another sale which is even earlier is $5213psm in Sep 06.
(4) this property “A” is sold to the wife of the boss of the agent.
If this property “A” is not resold again, would the fact that the property is sold at $7818psm to the wife of the boss of the agent be a conflict of interest?

Does the fact that the wife of the boss was able to resell the unit at a higher price means that there is a conflict of interest, since the unit is already sold at a higher psf than a close recent (2 months ago) sale?

Side track: Based on my personal “analysis”, most sales follow the trend of the previous sale. The ability to sell the unit at a higher price, tend to be due to the seller’s willingness to pay a premium over the trend, or is due to the seller’s perceived value of the unit is higher than the trend.

Summary details of sales*
Jul 07 10739psm Property “A” 2nd sale
Jul 07 7818psm Property “A” 1st sale
May 07 7237psm Property “A” immediate neighbor
Sep 06 5213psm Property “A” neighbor on same level

Details of median price for all apartments in Singapore*
2006Q4 7412psm
2007Q1 7790psm
2007Q2 8476psm
2007Q3 9178psm

However, does the ability to resell the unit at the higher price within the short time-frame of within 2 weeks, implied that the higher price buyer already exist in the picture, when the unit was sold to the wife of the boss of the agent?

Perhaps, the conclusion would be just not to place oneself in such a situation.

*The values presented are obtained from Realis database.

According to Lui Tuck Yew in Parliament yesterday, the incident involving MP Seng Han Thong, shows that
(1) “the Internet is not an effective self-regulated regime as some may have touted it to be”,
(2) that he does “not think the community itself has done enough to rebut some of those unhelpful comments delivered by fellow netizens”,
(3) “it is a squandered opportunity for a higher degree of self-regulation”, and
(4) he urged netizens to do more to define acceptable online conduct.

Somehow, this article really catches my eye. Is internet a self-regulating REGIME? When is internet a REGIME? According to the dictionary, regime means
1. a mode or system of rule or government: a dictatorial regime.
2. a ruling or prevailing system.
3. a government in power.
4. the period during which a particular government or ruling system is in power.
Isn’t the idea of internet as a PLATFORM for open access and free expression the norm?

Does his statement that not enough has been done to rebut some of those unhelpful comments, means that most online comments are “unhelpful”. Doesn’t this reflect the viewpoint of netizens? If internet is a REGIME, does it means that it is an “unhelpful” REGIME?

“Self-regulation”. “Acceptable online conduct”. Does it smells like official regulation is on the way?

Minister rues poor conduct
By Zakir Hussain, Political Correspondent

WHEN MP Seng Han Thong was set on fire by a Yio Chu Kang resident last month, he drew many online attacks that were vicious.

Some were ‘downright outrageous’, said Senior Minister of State (Information, Communications and the Arts) Lui Tuck Yew in Parliament yesterday.

He was referring to postings that included statements saying Mr Seng deserved to be assaulted and a list of 10 things he should ‘be thankful for’ in spite of being attacked.

But instead of silencing these attackers, the online community largely bit their tongue.

The tepid response of netizens to the nasty comments disappointed Rear-Admiral (NS) Lui, who said it was ‘quite apparent the Internet is not an effective self-regulated regime as some may have touted it to be’.

RADM Lui was replying to Ms Penny Low (Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC), who had asked for his views on netizens’ response to the physical attack on Mr Seng, MP for Yio Chu Kang.

He said: ‘I do not think the community itself has done enough to rebut some of these unhelpful comments delivered by fellow netizens.

‘It is a squandered opportunity for a higher degree of self-regulation.It would have been an example of the genesis, of the first steps, towards a more responsible, greater, self-regulatory regime.

‘But many of those responses were not rebutted or answered, and I think it is not healthy for some of this to remain on the Net unchallenged, unquestioned and unanswered.’

RADM Lui also urged netizens to do more to define acceptable online conduct.

Article obtained from StraitsTimes on 5 Feb 2009

The internet is part of the new media, as oppose to the papers which is the old media. In this new media, we have the blogosphere, which is a specific type of websites.

Some advertisers has been getting into this new media wagon, and either directly or indirectly advertise and influence their buyers. In relation to their interaction with blogosphere, their main modes of operation are direct advertisement, advertorial, or subliminal message of endorsement within blog articles.

As such, for these companies, part of their need with regards to this new media wagon, require them to approach bloggers of sufficient viewership with reputation in line with their product or service.

1) Viewership, can be measured by embedding a script within the blog webpages, in order to monitor the traffic.

2) However, the reputation of a blogger, is not easy to determine. As such, if the blogger decided to adhere to a set of “accreditation conduct”, advertisers will have a benchmark to use.

3) In addition, each blogger’s time schedule may not always coincide with advertiser’s schedule, and they may not be within the advertiser’s usual list of invites. As such, a win-win need is required, to allow bloggers (not within the usual list of invites) to obtain the invitations, and for the advertisers to engage those bloggers who are free to blog.

In conclusion, will these new media advertisement needs be fulfilled?

According to labour chief Lim Swee Say, “S’poreans should come last” in retrenchment. It reminds me of “one should give up seat to the pregnant and elderly”. Or perhaps, “one should procreate for the nation”. Should is a very overly used word, which practically no ones bothers. Self gain is the norm, while courtesy and patriotism are of short supply.

From the viewpoint of a profit-oriented company, which employs both S’poreans and foreign workers, the worker who is paid more for similar job scope will be the one who goes first.

Often, it is the S’porean who tends to be paid the higher salary, due to their higher bargaining power with the easy availability of work for job-hopping in boom years, and the calculation of wages based on last draw pay.

Foreigners (non-expats) workers, mostly due to the weakness of their currency with respect to Singapore dollar, tend to be paid lower compared to S’porean (but often a lot more when compared with salary back home), and are often more willing workers.

So, if a company is profit-oriented, why would they employ S’poreans in the first place? Ah ha. Each company has a ratio quota, based on the number of S’poreans and PRs already employed, which allows them to employ foreigners.

So, doesn’t the retrenchment of S’poreans prevent them from renewing the foreign worker’s pass? Ah ha. The trick, that is relatively well-known, is to apply PR for those foreign workers who are on employment pass or S pass.

The “excuse” of using the downturn to send workers for training, so that they will be well-trained and ready for boom years sounds hollow. The question is, with our lax employment rules, why spend the money training when you can just grab well-trained workers? Many, employed and unemployed are paying from their own pockets for training in view of keeping themselves employ-able.

2 weeks ago, as everyone has knew by now, COE for category A (cars that are 1600cc and below) fall to a market low of $2. We got lots of first time buyers rushing to the showrooms to get their cars.

The publicity has sort of pay off, as at 2:30pm, we have much more bids received, to be exact 39% more bids than the quota. However, it seems like most are hopping for a low low price, as the current COE price is still less than $4000.

Now, lets take a look at the other categories. I think the joke that might emerged is that we might get a $1 COE for open category E (which can be used to register any type of vehicle). At the moment, we are about 200 bids short from the quote.

More jokes might emerged, if we look at the softness of the market from the bids number and value. Sigh… indicator of recession.

Would the newest joke be $1 COE for open category?

Update at 4pm:
Apparently, the $2 COE is not to be repeated. The finally tally is as follows.

According to ST, more MRT trains with reduced 33% of seats will be plying the tracks from next week onwards. The rational to this changed, as given by LTA’s reply to the situation, was “removing some seats would thus raised people’s chances of boarding the train and give standing commuters more room”.

It sounds like the increases in the fare has not raised sufficient revenue (or profit?), and expense has to been reduced, by changing the structure of the train to reduce seats, rather than increasing the frequency of the train.

It also brings to mind on the level of service that public transport wishes to fulfill? Perhaps, it is just the bare minimum of transporting the passengers from point A to point B, without the comfort of at least a seat.

In addition, would this change actually becomes another push factor for the current passengers to purchase a car?

Lastly, why would it be LTA who is commenting on the change, rather than SMRT? Is this change a push from the authority, or is it a self-initiated change by SMRT?

I am quite sure, by now, everyone in Singapore, would have hear of the petition of the Serangoon Gardens’ residents who petitioned against the converting of the unused Serangoon Gardens Technical School into the foreign workers’ dorm.

We have self-righteous writers condemning these Serangoon Gardens’ residents as pathetic, prejudice, xenophobia, bigotry against poor people of other ethnic groups and nationalities, to the police and Ministry of Home Affairs concluding that their new statistics show foreigners, including construction workers, commit fewer crimes in relation to Singapore residents. We have NMP Mr Siew saying “That’s a difficult question to answer, but a large part of that fear is not really grounded in truth.” in reply to the question on whether the fears about migrant workers are justified. (More about the beautiful calculation of these statistics later.)

Now, lets look at what is “Ethnics Integration Policy“. Most people will not be familar with this policy. However, for everyone who had ever purchased new flats, resale flats, SERS (Selective En-bloc Redevelopment Scheme) or DBSS (Design, Build & Sell Scheme), they would have came across something called “Ethnic Group Eligibility”, which is the enforcement of the “Ethnics Integration Policy”. Basically, a maximum percentation is set for all ethnic groups for each block, and each neighborhood. That means, you cannot have an entire block of flats being sold to say all Malays (or for the matter all Chinese or all Indian/Others) only.

Quoting our beloved HDB website, “The Ethnic Integration Policy is to promote racial integration and harmony and to prevent the formation of racial enclaves, by ensuring a balanced ethnic mix among the various ethnic communities living in public housing estates.”

I will really wonder why such a well-thought of policy should not be apply to Serangoon Gardens, or for the matter any other areas. Serangoon Gardens’ is a residential of around 2000+ houses, while the dorm will house around 1500 foreign residents. If we apply the equivalent policy, the entire school will be equivalent to a block or more blocks. Why should a block/blocks be exempted from the equivalent per block limit? Moreover, what about the per neighborhood limit?

Oh. Ministry of National Development (MND) is not Housing Development Board (HDB). The policy don’t apply. Or, maybe, does it means that MND does not agree with our HDB policy of racial integration and harmony? Or maybe, my aged memory of the Singapore pledge “regardless of race, language or religion” is falling me?

Now, back to the beautiful calculation of these unjustified fears. Our never made public before figures from the authories say that the number of foreigners arrested last year in proportion to Singapore residents is lower. Firstly, their statistics shows that the arrest rate of work permit holders is just 277 per 100,000 total population, while the arrest rate of Singapore resident is 435 per 100,000 total population. Looks beautiful, isn’t? More Singaporean are arrested than work permit holders. But, hold it! Arrested does not mean crimes committed. It just show that our police force is able to arrest more Singapore residents than Work permit holders.

Do you remember that one can get away with assaulting stranger in Singapore? A foreigner, which you are unable to identify or track, can just hit you and walk away, and a police will not bother to run after the assaulter, as long as it is a non-grievous assault without weapon. Our in-famous Section 323 (Penal Code, Chapter 224, Section 323) is a non-seizable offence which the victim needs to get a Magistrate order, and must be able to track and identify the assaulter after the laspe of at least one day. Will such criminal ever be arrested for committed crime? How could the usage of arrested statistics be used to justified that crimes rate is low?

Beautiful statistics. The above is just one only illustrated example. What about vandalism and theft in which the culprits are never arrested? Would I even suggest that the number of reported crimes be disclosed, when beautiful arrest statistics are already given to conclude on crime rates?

A forum post that is selected by the editor to provoke argument for its extreme stand. Is a female a lesser creature than a male?

Gender equality or old Asian values?

THE population dearth is indeed a desperate situation which requires desperate measures. Are Singaporeans prepared to face the desperate truth, which is that the Singapore identity and culture that we were debating not long ago is fast becoming extinct? In recent years, Singapore has had to ‘fake’ its population by opening the floodgates to foreigners.

I agree with Mr Thomas Ling (‘Tackle the problem not the symptoms’, Aug 20) that upping financial incentives and maternity, paternity or childcare leave is barking up the wrong tree. This illustrates the adage that money cannot buy everything. Much reflection is needed on attitudes to life, career and relationships.

For one thing, young women today are almost totally lacking in fu dao (the way of women), a Confucian ethic. According to Confucius, ‘a woman should serve her family first and herself last‘. Young women today are too arrogant, too loud and don’t even know how to sit properly. It makes one wonder about their parents and shudder at the thought of them becoming mothers.

Give the men a break. Changing nappies is a woman’s job. Men are made for greater things than this. You wouldn’t ask a woman to carry a tonne of bricks, would you? Girls have to be taught their domestic duties and women have to be more hardworking at home. Girls should not grow up thinking the home is not their responsibility.

It is best for women to sacrifice a few years of their working life to nurture their families. Men, too, should be made more accountable on their role as breadwinners. This will create a win-win situation for all parties, including employers and children.

Our neighbourhoods are cold these days because of the absence of chatting mothers and mingling children.

In Chinese philosophy, women are yin and men are yang. They are complementary but not equal. When their energies are not balanced, there is disharmony.

A country that was built on Confucian ethics should perhaps rebuild on Confucian ethics. Unfortunately, this will not create the instant results we need. However, whatever is worth having will not come easily.

Jennifer Wee (Ms)

Article obtained from Straits Times on 28th Aug 2008

We have an excellent comment from Waterbutt, who has written what I am feeling.

Samsui women carried tonnes of bricks.

The Confucian ethics were founded when society was extremely partriarchical. It is unfair to apply these outdated ethics against women today. For years, women have been looked down upon as we are constantly relegated by men to domestic duties. Basically, women have been oppressed for centuries.

It is shocking that a woman in the modern world like Jennifer Wee actually dares to consider the ultra sexist confucian ethics for women as a suggestion to help singapore’s declining birth rate. Frankly, she has disgraced women all around the world, especially women who have fought against all odds for emancipation of their sex.

Just because women have less testosterone (hence less muscles), does that mean they are not allowed the same and equal opportunities as men?

I am still VERY appalled by Jennifer Wee’s suggestion and though it is not very clear from the way it is written, I really hope that she had it written in a sartorical voice. Otherwise, such mentality is a humongous and sad backstep for the ongoing and tough emancipation of women.

Comment obtained from Straits Times on 28th Aug 2008

We have another chameleon breaking news article. Some of the changes can be seen from the following image.

The original article can be obtained from the previous blog post, while the new article is below.

On trial: New ez-link card
By Christopher Tan, Senior Correspondent

FOUND: 10,000 public transport commuters to ‘test-ride’ a new ez-link card between Aug 29 and Oct 28.

Of these pre-selected users, those who clock at least 100 rides with the new card – which will eventually have several non-transit applications – will receive $20 public transport vouchers.

The new ez-link card is the first stored value card here to comply with the new Cepas standard.

Cepas stands for Singapore’s ‘Contactless ePurse Application’ – a secured platform for all non-cash transactions using contactless cards.

Besides train and bus fares, the new ez-link card can be used to pay for electronic road-pricing (ERP), parking and cab charges, as well as a meal or merchandise.

Currently, few outlets other than McDonald’s and 7-Eleven offer this payment option.

The current ez-link card will be phased out by end of next year. There are now about 10 million valid ez-link cards in circulation.

The Land Transport Authority said on Tuesday that it hopes commuters taking part in the trial can clock one million rides.

It said this number would give it ample opportunity to identify and weed out any glitches there might be before the new card is launched by ‘end of this year or early next year.”

LTA deputy chief executive Lim Bok Ngam said the authority has invested some $100 million to roll out the new card. The sum includes development cost, modifying the 22,000 card readers on buses and at trains stations, getting the new cards manufactured and other related costs.

‘We currently have two card platforms in Singapore. One for public transport, and another for cars and other commercial transactions. With the new Cepas-compliant ez-link card, you can make all transactions with just one card,” he said.

The move also opens up the market for new card issuers to enter the transit market, which has so far been exclusive to LTA-owned EZ Link Pte Ltd.

The competition, Mr Lim said, would ultimately be good for consumers. For one, the price of the card should come down (both Nets’ Cashcard and the current ez-link card costs $5 today).

Observers said there is little to prevent a card issuer from giving the card free of charge – like credit cards.

Mr Lim foresees card companies to build in loyalty programmes as well, so as to attract and retain customers.

As for motorists, they can look forward to using the new ez-link card for ERP payments from early next year, when a new-generation in-vehicle unit is installed in new cars.

Owners of existing vehicles who want the new gadget can have it installed, for $150, excluding GST.

Article obtained from Straits Times on 26th Aug 2008

Reading the latest news on the Straits Times, that 10,000 public transport commuters are “WANTED” to ‘test-ride’ the new Cepas-compliant ezlink card, and that “volunteers can sign up at TransitLink Ticket offices located at most bus interchanges and MRT stations”, I enthusiastically along with a friend visited the nearest transitlink office immediately after working hours, expecting that my existing ezlink card will be changed to the new Cepas-compliant card as mentioned in the news.

Sigh. The enthusiastic spirit was dampen with the replies of the officer on duty. There is an unwritten selection process for ‘volunteers’. It is not as simple as just walking up the transitlink office, and volunteering to sign up for the ‘test-ride’. According to the officer on duty, ezlink cards holders will only be notified that they are eligible as a ‘volunteer’ for the ‘test-ride’ when their ezlink card is scanned at the transitlink office counter. The selection criteria is unknown, and only those eligible card holder will be allow to sign up as a volunteer. There is no application form to be a volunteer.

Upon hearing the unwritten selection process, which differs from the news article, we triple checked with the station control personnel, and another transitlink office. The station control personnel has only received a fax on this issue this afternoon, and is not knowledgeable in the exact process, while the next officer on duty at another transitlink office provided the same information.

Personnally, I really wonder why is there a need to make volunteering so difficult. Why is there an omission in mentioning that there is a selection? Why make simple process so difficult?

On trial: New ez-link card
By Christopher Tan, Senior Correspondent

WANTED: 10,000 public transport commuters to ‘test-ride’ a new ez-link card between Aug 29 and Oct 28.

Those who clock at least 100 rides with the new card – which will eventually have several non-transit applications – will receive $20 public transport vouchers.

Volunteers can sign up at TransitLink ticket offices located at most bus interchanges and MRT stations. They will get to exchange their existing ez-link cards for the new Cepas-compliant cards.

Cepas stands for Singapore’s ‘Contactless ePurse Application’ – a secured platform for all non-cash transactions using contactless cards.

Besides train and bus fares, the new ez-link card can be used to pay for electronic road-pricing (ERP), carparks, cabs as well as a meal or merchandise.

Currently, few outlets other than McDonald’s and 7-Eleven offer this payment option.

Public transport commuters and motorists who take buses and trains occasionally should sign up for the trial. This is because the existing ez-link card will be phased out by around end of next year.

There are now about 10 million valid ez-link cards in circulation.

The Land Transport Authority said on Tuesday it hopes commuers taking part in the trial can clock one million rides in total. It said this number would give it ample opportunity to identify and weed out any glitches there might be before the new card is launched by ‘end of this year or early next year.”

LTA deputy chief executive Lim Bok Ngam said some $100 million has been invested to roll out the new card. The sum includes modifying the 22,000 card readers on buses and at trains stations, obtaining the new cards and other related costs.

‘We currently have two card platforms in Singapore. One for public transport, and another for cars and other commercial transactions. With the new Cepas-compliant ez-link card, you can make all transactions with just one card,” he said.

The move also opens up the market for new card issuers to enter the transit market, which has so far been exclusive to LTA-owned EZ Link Pte Ltd.

The competition, Mr Lim said, would ultimately be good for consumers. For one, the price of the card should come down (both Nets’ Cashcard and the current ez-link card costs $5 today).

In fact, the LTA said there is little to prevent a card issuer from giving the card free of charge – like credit cards.

Mr Lim expects card companies to build in loyalty programmes as well, to attract and retain customers.

As for motorists, they can look forward to using the new ez-link card for ERP payments from early next year, when a new-generation in-vehicle unit is installed in new cars.

Owners of existing vehicles who want the new gadget can have it installed, for $150, excluding GST.

Article obtained from Straits Times on 26th Aug 2008