- Details of the placement. The indicative price of RM1.84 for the placement was based on its 5-market day volume weighted average price (VWAP) up to 31st March 2016, and on the basis of no dividend being declared or paid. Based on an adjusted issue price of RM1.80 (on the basis of the new share issuance not being entitled to the first and final dividend of FY15), the exercise will raise cash proceeds of c.RM1bn, and is expected to be completed by 3QFY16 subject to approval from shareholders and any other regulatory authorities (e.g. Bursa Securities and BNM).
- Utilisation of proceeds. The gross proceeds of c.RM1bn from the placement will be used for the prepayment and repayment of debt, financing of aircraft acquisitions, engines and parts, pre-delivery payments of aircraft, general corporate and working capital, and the expenditures. It is expected to generate an annual interest savings of c.RM10.7m from the prepayment of bank borrowings, while net gearing level will reduce from 2.0x to 1.6x for FY16F.
- Rationale of the placement. We understand that a placement exercise is the best option for the group to strengthen its balance sheet without having to incur additional borrowings and related interest expenses compared to issuing Medium Term Notes. However, it is expected to have a dilutive effect on AirAsia’s EPS. Based on the enlarged share capital of 3.3bn shares, our forecasted FY17 EPS will be diluted by approximately 7% to 25.0 sen from 28.7 sen.
- Downgrade to Neutral. We are downgrading our call to Neutral due to limited upside. Our new target price of RM2.00 (previously RM1.88) is pegged on 8x FY17F (previously 10x FY16F). The reduction in multiples is due to on-going volatility in oil and currencies. The forecast is based on enlarged share capital and we include in the new additional income from maintenance of leased aircrafts to its associates for FY16F-18F.
Monday, April 4, 2016
AirAsia - Proposed Placement to Tune Live
AirAsia announced that it has entered into a conditional subscription agreement with Tune Live Sdn Bhd, which is equally owned by both Tan Sri Dr Anthony Francis Fernandes and Datuk Kamarudin Bin Meranun. The proposed placement will see an issuance of 559m new ordinary shares, representing 16.7% of its enlarged share base which would increase its capital from 2.8bn to 3.3bn shares of RM0.10 each. The shares will be issued at an issue price of RM1.84 per share via cash. We are downgrading our call to Neutral due to limited upside. Our new target price of RM2.00 (previously RM1.88) is pegged on 8x FY17F (previously 10x FY16F). Our forecast is based on enlarged share capital and we include in the new additional income from maintenance of leased aircrafts to its associates for FY16F-18F.
Sunday, April 3, 2016
Airasia to raise RM1bil via share placements with founders.
AirAsia to raise RM1b via share placement with founders
Author: Tan KW | Publish date: Fri, 1 Apr 2016, 05:44 PM
KUALA LUMPUR (April 1): AirAsia Bhd has entered into a share subscription agreement with its founders Tan Sri Tony Fernandes and Datuk Kamarudin Meranun to raise RM1.01 billion.
In a filing with Bursa Malaysia today, the budget airline said it has entered into a conditional subscription agreement with Fernandes and Kamarudin through Tune Live Sdn Bhd, to issue and subscribe 559 million new shares in AirAsia at RM1.84 per share, in order to raise RM1.01 billion.
The issue price represents a 0.6% premium to the airline's last closing price of RM1.83 and a 31.4% premium to the 12-month volume weighted average price of RM1.41 per share.
Tune Live, which is currently dormant, is equally-owned by Fernandes and Kamarudin. Upon completion of the proposed shares issuance, Tune Live will hold 15.7% of the enlarged issued capital of AirAsia.
As at March 28, Fernandes and Kamarudin hold directly and indirectly, a total of 18.9% shareholding in AirAsia. The duo hold a combined 18.87% stake in AirAsia via another private vehicle named Tune Air Sdn Bhd.
Post the proposed shares issuance, Fernandes and Kamarudin will hold a 32.5% stake in AirAsia, just slightly under the 33% threshold to make a mandatory general offer to the airline's minority shareholders.
AirAsia said it will use the raised proceeds to reduce its gearing from 2.79 times now to 2.22 times post the proposed shares issuance, financing of aircraft, engines and parts, pre-delivery payments of aircraft, general corporate and working capital, and the expenditures related to the exercise. About 10.3% or RM103.82 million of the funds will be used to partially fund the construction of its new headquarters at klia2, which is scheduled to be completed this year.
According to AirAsia, it will convene an extraordinary general meeting to seek approval from its non-interested shareholders for the proposed shares issuance.
On the rationale, AirAsia said the shares issuance is the most appropriate means of fund-raising, since the terms for its US$1 billion Multicurrency Medium Term Note (MTN) Programme which was announced on Jan 6, 2016, were not favourable due to weak market sentiments.
"The proposed shares issuance is expected to generate annual interest savings of approximately RM10.69 million, arising from the pre-payment of bank borrowings," it added.
Barring any unforeseen circumstances and subject to all relevant approvals being obtained, AirAsia targets to complete the corporate exercise by the third quarter of 2016.
Shares in AirAsia will resume trading next Monday (April 4). The stock was not traded today. It last closed at RM1.83 per share, for a market value of RM4.93 billion.
In a filing with Bursa Malaysia today, the budget airline said it has entered into a conditional subscription agreement with Fernandes and Kamarudin through Tune Live Sdn Bhd, to issue and subscribe 559 million new shares in AirAsia at RM1.84 per share, in order to raise RM1.01 billion.
The issue price represents a 0.6% premium to the airline's last closing price of RM1.83 and a 31.4% premium to the 12-month volume weighted average price of RM1.41 per share.
Tune Live, which is currently dormant, is equally-owned by Fernandes and Kamarudin. Upon completion of the proposed shares issuance, Tune Live will hold 15.7% of the enlarged issued capital of AirAsia.
As at March 28, Fernandes and Kamarudin hold directly and indirectly, a total of 18.9% shareholding in AirAsia. The duo hold a combined 18.87% stake in AirAsia via another private vehicle named Tune Air Sdn Bhd.
Post the proposed shares issuance, Fernandes and Kamarudin will hold a 32.5% stake in AirAsia, just slightly under the 33% threshold to make a mandatory general offer to the airline's minority shareholders.
AirAsia said it will use the raised proceeds to reduce its gearing from 2.79 times now to 2.22 times post the proposed shares issuance, financing of aircraft, engines and parts, pre-delivery payments of aircraft, general corporate and working capital, and the expenditures related to the exercise. About 10.3% or RM103.82 million of the funds will be used to partially fund the construction of its new headquarters at klia2, which is scheduled to be completed this year.
According to AirAsia, it will convene an extraordinary general meeting to seek approval from its non-interested shareholders for the proposed shares issuance.
On the rationale, AirAsia said the shares issuance is the most appropriate means of fund-raising, since the terms for its US$1 billion Multicurrency Medium Term Note (MTN) Programme which was announced on Jan 6, 2016, were not favourable due to weak market sentiments.
"The proposed shares issuance is expected to generate annual interest savings of approximately RM10.69 million, arising from the pre-payment of bank borrowings," it added.
Barring any unforeseen circumstances and subject to all relevant approvals being obtained, AirAsia targets to complete the corporate exercise by the third quarter of 2016.
Shares in AirAsia will resume trading next Monday (April 4). The stock was not traded today. It last closed at RM1.83 per share, for a market value of RM4.93 billion.
Tuesday, March 29, 2016
Genting - A Closer Look At TauRx
Genting’s share price has moved up by over 20% over the past two months. We believe this is due to speculation on the potential listing of its 21%-owned pharmaceutical unit TauRx as well as the return of foreign interest, given its high foreign shareholdings level of approximately 50%. At current levels, we believe upside is limited. Maintain NEUTRAL with our TP revised to MYR9.08 (from MYR8.00, 2% downside).
Source: RHB Research - 29 Mar 2016
TauRx a giant in the making? TauRx Pharmaceuticals (TauRx) plans to present results from its third phase of human trials on its experimental Alzheimer’s drug known as LMTX by Jul 2016. According to preliminaryresearch results published in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease, patients whotook its LMTX treatment had better cognitive scores than those who did not receive it. Should the results prove to be favourable, the Wall Street Journal reported that the group would file for an IPO with an indicative market capitalisation of USD15bn.
Impact on Genting. While we acknowledge that the market potential for TauRx could be massive, with more than 40m Alzheimer’s patients estimated worldwide, we highlight that there were about 123 experimental Alzheimer’s medicines that had failed to commence commercial production between 1998 and 2014. Based on our channel checks, Genting has invested USD120m for its existing 21% stake in TauRx. Should the IPO materialise, the value of Genting’s stake in TauRx could blloon to over USD2.2bn (assuming its 21% stake would be diluted to 15% post-IPO). This could potentially translate into value accretion of MYR2.30-2.50 per share in Genting. We have yet to factor this into our valuation, pending the confirmation of results from its latest trials. Las Vegas to open in 2018. The proposed USD4bn Resorts World Las Vegas (RWLV) recently received the green light from the Clark County commissioners to proceed with construction. The site office and parking garages are currently being constructed and would be completed by mid-2016. Management highlighted that the public tender on the work packages would soon be called, with physical construction works likely to begin in 2H16. We reiterate our view that phase one of the project would open earliest by mid-2018. Although nearterm earnings-accretion is unlikely, RWLV could, in the long run, help to address investors’ perception of the group being a holding company.
Maintain NEUTRAL. We raise our TP to MYR9.08 (from MYR8.00), factoring in our latest valuation on its listed subsidiaries and pegging a revised discount of 15% (from 25%). This is to reflect improved market sentiment amidst te return of foreign institutions (as evidenced by YTD net inflows of MYR1.6bn by foreignthe limited downside, we maintain our NEUTRAL call. The upside risk to our call would be clinical results of LMTX proving favourable, while key downside risks include further delays for RWLV and unsuccessful clinical trials.
Source: RHB Research - 29 Mar 2016
Monday, March 28, 2016
AirAsia shares surge on news of potential privatisation
KUALA LUMPUR: Maybank Investment Bank Research is “neutral” on the news that AirAsia Bhd could be privatised and has downgraded the stock to “hold”.
Over the weekend, a business weekly reported that Tune Air (AirAsia founder) in partnership with China Everbright was planning to privatise AirAsia, citing sources familiar with the matter. However, company official stated they have not received any formal offer and would not comment.
“We are neutral on this event pending details. We now rate AirAsia as a ‘hold’ (previously buy) as the current share price, which has outperformed, offers limited upside to our unchanged target price of RM1.80, which is pegged to one time 2016 P/BV,” it said.
Maybank said AirAsia had a long history of ‘privatisation’ attempts. Since the budget carrier was listed back in November 2004, rumours of privatisation have surfaced time and again.
“By our count, there was at least five such ‘attempts’ and this latest one makes it six. However, there was never a formal offer made to AirAsia for a privatisation, thus inferring that it was not as ‘imminent’ as the market would have thought.
“A privatisation, if true, and at the last share price of RM1.81, would mean RM4.08bil to be forked out by both Tune Air and China Everbright,” Maybank said.
AirAsia, the second most active counters today, is up 6 sen to RM1.87.
Maybank said the facts were unconvincing for a privatisation to happen this time. It recalled that AirAsia had called for an Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) on Dec 15, 2015 just to secure shareholders’ mandate to buy back 10% of its shares, effectively “sending a firm message that it is not for sale”
AirAsia has commenced its first buy back tranche shortly after announcing its fourth quarter 2015 results in February 2016.
“This maiden buy back proves that the management is making good of its ‘not for sale’ declaration. Furthermore, Tune Air has not accumulated shares in AirAsia for the past 12 months, according to filings to the Malaysian stock exchange. And if China Everbright has, the stake will be less than 5% which does not require filing to the exchange,” it said.
AirAsia’s share price has surged by 30% after releasing its positive fourth quarter FY15 results in end-Feb 2016.
“It is now at our target price of RM1.80, and we downgrade the stock to a hold. Should the share price spike further on this privatisation angle, we recommend investors to take profit and recycle the booty into other quality airlines such as IndiGo and Cebu Air,” Maybank said.
http://www.thestar.com.my/business/business-news/2016/03/28/airasia-shares-surge-on-news-of-potential-privatisation/
Over the weekend, a business weekly reported that Tune Air (AirAsia founder) in partnership with China Everbright was planning to privatise AirAsia, citing sources familiar with the matter. However, company official stated they have not received any formal offer and would not comment.
“We are neutral on this event pending details. We now rate AirAsia as a ‘hold’ (previously buy) as the current share price, which has outperformed, offers limited upside to our unchanged target price of RM1.80, which is pegged to one time 2016 P/BV,” it said.
Maybank said AirAsia had a long history of ‘privatisation’ attempts. Since the budget carrier was listed back in November 2004, rumours of privatisation have surfaced time and again.
“A privatisation, if true, and at the last share price of RM1.81, would mean RM4.08bil to be forked out by both Tune Air and China Everbright,” Maybank said.
AirAsia, the second most active counters today, is up 6 sen to RM1.87.
Maybank said the facts were unconvincing for a privatisation to happen this time. It recalled that AirAsia had called for an Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) on Dec 15, 2015 just to secure shareholders’ mandate to buy back 10% of its shares, effectively “sending a firm message that it is not for sale”
AirAsia has commenced its first buy back tranche shortly after announcing its fourth quarter 2015 results in February 2016.
“This maiden buy back proves that the management is making good of its ‘not for sale’ declaration. Furthermore, Tune Air has not accumulated shares in AirAsia for the past 12 months, according to filings to the Malaysian stock exchange. And if China Everbright has, the stake will be less than 5% which does not require filing to the exchange,” it said.
AirAsia’s share price has surged by 30% after releasing its positive fourth quarter FY15 results in end-Feb 2016.
“It is now at our target price of RM1.80, and we downgrade the stock to a hold. Should the share price spike further on this privatisation angle, we recommend investors to take profit and recycle the booty into other quality airlines such as IndiGo and Cebu Air,” Maybank said.
http://www.thestar.com.my/business/business-news/2016/03/28/airasia-shares-surge-on-news-of-potential-privatisation/
Wednesday, March 23, 2016
AirAsia holds its ground
This article first appeared in The Edge Malaysia Weekly, on March 7 - 13, 2016.
IT is amazing what a little competition can do.
IT is amazing what a little competition can do.
Few thought much of AirAsia Bhd back in 2001, when it was burdened with a debt of RM40 million, owned just two old aircraft bought at a laughable bargain of RM2 and boasted the famous tagline, “Now Everyone Can Fly”. The skies in Asia, after all, were reserved for established institutions — the full-service carriers (FSCs) — and air travel was mostly for the higher-income group.
But AirAsia appealed to an untapped Asian market. By 2003, the low-cost carrier (LCC) had expanded its operations to a second hub in Johor Baru and made its first international flight to Phuket, following a joint venture with Thailand’s Shin Corp. A year later, it bought into Indonesian airline PT AWAIR and was listed on the Main Market of Bursa Malaysia. Through joint ventures, it now has bases in the Philippines, Japan and India.
Some observers claim that AirAsia’s rapid expansion contributed to the gradual demise of national carrier Malaysian Airline System Bhd (MAS). By most accounts, the two airlines operated on different cost structures and served separate, distinct market segments. But MAS found its market share slowly being chipped away as consumers gravitated towards AirAsia’s no-frills, low-budget business model.
Based on Malaysia Airports Holdings Bhd data, MAS had a 49.1% share of passenger movements at the Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA) in 2006 compared with AirAsia’s 13.1%. By 2014, MAS’ share had shrunk to 30.4% while AirAsia’s had grown to 40%.
The national carrier responded by lowering fare prices and increasing capacity, which hurt both companies. But after years of losses and two air tragedies, MAS was forced to restructure. A new management started to rationalise its routes, which led to a capacity reduction and put an end to price dumping. The carrier rebranded itself as Malaysia Airlines Bhd.
AirAsia seems to have come up on top in that rivalry but there is a sense of relief too that years of confrontation with FSCs in a cost-conscious industry has finally come to an end.
AirAsia CEO Aireen Omar tells The Edge that pricing discipline post the MAS restructuring is “good overall for the whole industry”. “There is now better discipline and revenue management. You see less price dumping. This means we are not killing everybody and ourselves,” she says.
As Malaysia Airlines tries to find its feet, AirAsia, the “World’s Best Low-Cost Airline” for the seventh year running, is facing competition of a different kind. “The landscape has changed since the MAS restructuring,” says Daniel Wong, an analyst with Hong Leong Investment Bank Research.
Competition with FSCs is less direct now. More airlines are establishing their own low-cost divisions to get a slice of the growing LCC pie in Asia without sacrificing their brands or profit margins. For instance, Singapore Airlines has Tigerair and Scoot under its wing while Garuda Indonesia’s budget wing is called Citilink.
“Since Malaysia Airlines, FSCs have realised that they cannot compete directly with an LCC like AirAsia. That is why you see some of them establishing subsidiaries to introduce an LCC. It differentiates them but still puts them in a position to benefit from the growing market,” Wong says.
The skies are getting crowded with more LCCs. CAPA Centre for Aviation reports there were 23 LCCs in Southeast Asia in 2015, with the number of aircraft growing 13%. In the last three years, the number of aircraft in the region has increased from 400 to 600.
In AirAsia’s stronghold — Malaysia — new entrants like Rayani Air are trying to stake a claim in the LCC space.
Hybrid airline Malindo Air — a joint venture between National Aerospace and Defence Industries of Malaysia (51%) and Lion Air of Indonesia (49%) — is growing its presence. It is worth noting that in 2014, Malindo Air saw the biggest growth in international passenger movement at KLIA, growing 854.6% year on year and moving over 698 million passengers. In terms of overall domestic traffic, Malindo came in third, growing 5.5% y-o-y.
AirAsia was second, behind Malaysia Airlines, but its growth slowed to 3.7%. And the landscape could get more challenging as growth in passenger traffic is slowing in Malaysia. In 2015, MAHB recorded passenger traffic of 83.7 million, which was a growth of only 0.4% y-o-y, compared with 4.6% the year before.
Aireen, however, points out that AirAsia’s biggest and most obvious advantage is its vast network.
“Malindo is not just working against AirAsia Malaysia but the whole (AirAsia) group. It is the whole network that they are coming up against … whatever network they [LCCs] have built will have to come up against the whole of the AirAsia network. So, that is something that competitors need to consider when you compete in this region,” she says.
“It is the size of the network — the number of routes and destinations that we have, the frequencies and the main and secondary hubs. Each hub creates its own connectivity, whether domestic or international, and that builds the strength of the network.”
Together with its long-haul sister company AirAsia X Bhd, AirAsia flies to 88 destinations and has a fleet size of 202. This year, it will take delivery of nine A320neo to replace older aircraft or add to its fleet and has deliveries lined up until 2028.
But such a vast network leaves AirAsia fighting on all fronts and at high cost. Each national aviation market, Wong says, has different dynamics that AirAsia must come to terms with. Access to technology and internet service is a problem in Indonesia because AirAsia tickets are mostly sold online. In the Philippines, AirAsia is a fairly late and small entrant, contending with local favourites such as Cebu Pacific Air. In India, regulatory hurdles and opposition from local firms can impede the early stages of a business’ growth. Confronting these challenges will require time.
Of the six geographical segments it operates in, only AirAsia Malaysia and AirAsia Thailand are profitable. For the financial year ended Dec 31, 2015 (FY2015), AirAsia registered a net profit of RM540.9 million on the back of RM6.3 billion in revenue, compared with FY2014’s net profit of RM82.8 million and revenue of RM5.4 billion.
Investors are clearly happy with the news. Since the FY2015 results were announced on Feb 28, AirAsia’s share price has improved 4.29%. Last Friday, it closed at RM1.73, rising a sharp 34% year to date.
However, Indonesia AirAsia recorded a core loss of RM332.4 million and another RM465.4 million of unabsorbed losses from the previous year. In the Philippines, AirAsia incurred a loss of RM77.9 million while its Indian and Japanese associates lost RM29.7 million and RM28.6 million respectively in FY2015.
Aireen aims to turn all of AirAsia’s associates around by the end of the year. “We are confident that we have seen the worst and all our associates will do better. The aim is to turn it profitable [this year].”
One reason for her optimism is that operation costs have fallen, thanks to low jet fuel prices. Based on the company’s unaudited income statement for FY2015, AirAsia spent about RM250 million less on fuel than a year ago. Another indicator is that AirAsia Malaysia’s cost per available seat kilometre (CASK) fell 4% y-o-y to 12.61 sen, although CASK-ex fuel rose 9% in FY2015 to 7.26 sen.
A Maybank Research note says AirAsia will enjoy “a significant step-down lower fuel cost” as expensive fuel hedges in 2015 have expired (50% at US$88 per barrel). AirAsia has hedged roughly 30% of its fuel requirements at an average price of US$52 per barrel for 2016.
Another factor is that foreign exchange fluctuations will have less of an impact on its financials this year. Not only has the ringgit stabilised against the US dollar but AirAsia had also hedged half its forex exposure at 3.22 for its long-term liabilities. This is important because a significant portion of AirAsia’s borrowings is denominated in US dollars. As at Dec 31, 2015, its US dollar debt stood at RM10.9 billion while total debt was RM12.62 billion. Debt and payables due in 2016 amount to RM4 billion, higher than its cash balance of RM2.4 billion.
At the same time, AirAsia still wants to expand and has plans for new routes and destinations, to increase frequencies on existing routes and to develop new secondary hubs. It made Langkawi its latest secondary hub after successfully negotiating a 70% reduction in airport charges.
Aireen says the outlook for AirAsia is “positive” this year and for the longer term. That is likely to be true if it can hold its ground against its regional competitors.
http://www.theedgemarkets.com/my/article/airasia-holds-its-ground
TauRx估值上看620億‧雲頂受外資追捧
（吉隆坡21日訊）雲頂（GENTING，3182，主板貿服組）近期深獲投資者追捧，安聯星展研究相信在主要子公司均欠缺催化劑之際，市場酷愛雲頂或與該公司持股20.7%、估值謠傳上看150億美元（約620億令吉）的新加坡TauRx藥劑公司有關。
安聯星展指出，TauRx新發明的阿爾茨海默氏病（AD，也稱老人癡呆症）藥物——LMTX，最早可能在今年7月公佈最終人體測試結果，初期研究顯示LMTX對於治療AD有正面影響。
“若LMTX通過測試階段，TauRx則有望一如市場早前估計般，在明年啟動上市計劃，市場早前估計TauRx的估值上看150億美元。以此價值作準，雲頂的每股重估淨資產值（RNAV）可能從目前的9令吉40仙，大增至12令吉37仙。”
但是，若藥物測試持續無法取得突破，TauRx的市值可能被大幅拉低。無論如何，安聯星展目前尚未把TauRx的潛在價值納入估值計算。
據瞭解，雲頂至今在TauRx的投資額估計為1億2千萬美元。
雲頂新加坡仍謹慎
博彩業務方面，安聯星展對雲頂新加坡（GENS）的看法依然謹慎，原因是豪賭客業務仍充滿挑戰；不過，另一家博彩臂膀——雲頂大馬（GENM，4715，主板貿服組）展望則相對受看好，原因是雲頂綜合旅遊計劃（GITP）可望成為盈利催化劑。
無論如何，由於GITP投資額已倍增至104億令吉，安聯星展不排除計劃延遲啟用的可能性。
該行還補充，雲頂截至去年6月的外資持股比例高達47%，因此可能深受外資流的影響；值得一提的是，雲頂股價近期水漲船高，正好與外資重新湧入馬股趨勢相吻合。
目標價上調
由於投資環境改善，安聯星展研究決定把控股公司折價調低至15%，雲頂目標價因此獲上調至8令吉零5仙，投資評級則維持在“守住”不變。
雲頂今日以9令吉50仙收市，漲18仙。（星洲日報／財經‧報導：李三宇）
賺得仲勁過索羅斯的Uncle Ray
那天在深圳高新科技區一間互聯網金融公司，那條福建佬和我侃侃而談索羅斯和巴菲特的投資理念，聽足佢半個鐘吹水，「福建叔叔，這兩位伯伯已經Out啦。」我都唔好意思串佢，「不如你研究下橋水的Uncle Ray啦。」Ray Dalio是全球最大對沖基金Bridgewater Associates創辦人，到2015年為止，Uncle Ray的橋水基金已經超越索羅斯的量子基金，成為有史以來賺最多錢的對沖基金，佢旗下的Pure Alpha對沖基金，自1991年創辦以來一共賺咗450億美元，他有一句名言：「大部份人意見通常都是錯的，我必須做獨立思考。」
佢今年只係67歲，私人財富超過百億美元，佢唔止賺很多錢，捐的錢也不少，其實，他一生都在做公益，已簽署Bill Gates和巴菲特倡議的Giving Pledge (財富捐贈誓言)。
不過，他的Bridgewater Associates本身也非常注重對公眾利益的服務。放下富人的資產與豐厚報酬不顧，轉身服務機構投資者，其客戶包括養老基金、捐贈基金、國外的政府以及中央銀行等。現在，橋水基金的Daily Observation已經成為全世界各大中央銀行高管以及養老基金經理的必讀內容。可是，橋水基金的業績增長，也使市場只關注到橋水基金的多種創新投資策略，而非他的公益行為。
佢曾經預言，美國經濟今年只有1.5%的增長，聯儲局如果要救經濟，唔係加息係要再推QE4第四輪量化寬鬆計劃，佢嘅觀點往往與眾不同，所以FDT馬蔚華行長才邀請佢成為顧問。
去年11月，中國首家國際性公益學校，深圳國際公益學院成立，目標在中國培養具有全球影響力的公益人才。學院的發起人之一正是Ray Dalio，看看左邊的就是標基及馬行長。
他個仔Matthew更是傳承了Uncle Ray的公益心，他創立了China Care Foundation致力為中國孤殘兒童籌集善款，讓他們有更好的生存環境。同時馬Matthew認識了民政部慈善事業與社會福利司第一任司長王振耀，王振耀5年前辭職投身公益教育，成為Uncle Ray發起深圳國際公益學院的核心牽線人。
識貨嘅梗係不止FDT馬行長，佢個理論收到不少名人推崇，聯儲局主席Paul Volcker，曾經宣稱Ray自製的統計數據，比聯儲局更加有用，債券大王Bill Gross也聲稱，聯儲局的理論模型早已經過時，應該借鑒Ray Dalio的獨有模型。
Ray Dalio最初在哥爾夫球場當球僮，當時好多華爾街Trader都是座上客，後來佢聽呢班人的建議，用成副身家$300買入人生第一支股票東北航空Northeast Air，當時呢支股票股價$5雞，係佢唯一買得起的股票，後來呢間公司俾人收購，令佢贏到開巷。
2007年佢曾預測美國房貸市場將會崩潰，下一年金融海嘯果然爆發，標準普爾全年跌四成，佢嘅對沖基金仍然交出9.5%的回報。佢認為做投資要不恥下問，每個人都應該問，包括高爾夫球球僮、飛髮佬、交易員，每位都是老師，最重要的唔係結論，而是他們思考的過程。
2007年佢曾預測美國房貸市場將會崩潰，下一年金融海嘯果然爆發，標準普爾全年跌四成，佢嘅對沖基金仍然交出9.5%的回報。佢認為做投資要不恥下問，每個人都應該問，包括高爾夫球球僮、飛髮佬、交易員，每位都是老師，最重要的唔係結論，而是他們思考的過程。
3月19日，Ray將帶著他對公益價值投資的新看法赴北京釣魚臺，參加2016年中國發展高層論壇。仲有，今次總決賽，佢會做評判。
從去年10月成立至今，FDT金融創新工廠已經走過了400多日。在過去的一年多，擁有了來自牛津、劍橋、哈佛、北大、清華、香港科大、倫敦政治經濟學院、帝國理工大學、芝加哥U、哥倫比亞、賓夕法尼亞大學、加州大學、南加利福尼亞大學等全球近百所知名高校的20多萬名大學生使用者，其中大陸有10萬多使用者。
在過去的400多日，FDT在全球舉辦200多場比賽，其中大陸近百場。為3000多名比賽獲獎學生發放助學金400多萬元。還與牛津大學、清華、帝國理工大學、倫敦政經學院、哥倫比亞大學、臺大、香港科大、印度理工大學等數十所全球頂尖高校建立戰略合作。發放了數千萬種子基金給近百位種子學員。未來還計畫提供1億元種子基金和1千萬元比賽助學金。
在過去的400多日，FDT在全球舉辦200多場比賽，其中大陸近百場。為3000多名比賽獲獎學生發放助學金400多萬元。還與牛津大學、清華、帝國理工大學、倫敦政經學院、哥倫比亞大學、臺大、香港科大、印度理工大學等數十所全球頂尖高校建立戰略合作。發放了數千萬種子基金給近百位種子學員。未來還計畫提供1億元種子基金和1千萬元比賽助學金。
還與Bridgwater橋水基金、Janus Capital、摩根大通、招商銀行建立戰略合作關係，通過整合雙方核心資源，為全球大學生的成長提供更多優質機會與平臺。
為什麼要撐香港的Startup？發掘、培養、成就全球金融人才是宗旨。目前FDT正舉辦第一屆FDT全球大學生投資大賽，該比賽將是業內規模最大、最專業的，專為大學生群體打造的投資類賽事，並獨家免費提供10萬美元實盤操作機會。同時我們正在打造「FDT 學院」和「FDT SCORE」等產品，將從金融課程教育、金融人才評分等方面全方位培養金融人才。
AirAsia in good financial position
Aireen (left) at the send-off ceremony of AirAsia’s inaugural flight from Penang to Yangon, Myanmar.BAYAN LEPAS (Penang): AirAsia Bhd is in a good financial position for its upcoming financial year ending Dec 31, 2016 (FY16), thanks to low crude oil prices and the timeliness of the airline’s hedging practices against the commodity.
Its chief executive officer (CEO) Aireen Omar reiterated the statement made by AirAsia’s group CEO Tan Sri Tony Fernandes, which was reported in The Economic Times of India, that oil prices, which are currently trading at levels of US$41.54 (RM166.16) for Brent Crude Futures, “will stay where it is”.
Fuel costs account for a significant portion of AirAsia’s operational cost, therefore, lower prices will help enhance the airline’s profitability.
“We are confident of good [financial] growth in 2016; low oil prices are fantastic for operations, and the fact that we didn’t hedge a lot earlier before the oil prices came off resulted in us not being subjected to high hedges, unlike other airlines, “ she told reporters at a news conference yesterday in conjunction with Air Asia’s inaugural flight from Penang to Yangon, Myanmar.
For FY15, AirAsia’s net profit grew more than sixfold to RM540.96 million from RM82.8 million in FY14, while revenue came in at RM6.3 billion in FY15, up 16.3% from RM5.4 billion the previous year.
AirAsia has also been vocal in its dissatisfaction with the operating conditions at klia2, which is operated by Malaysia Airports Holdings Bhd (MAHB).
On July 31 last year, the low-cost carrier issued a letter of demand to MAHB and its subsidiary Malaysia Airports (Sepang) Sdn Bhd , seeking RM409 million for losses and damages as a result of its operations at the new budget terminal klia2 as well as from the earlier low-cost carrier terminal (LCCT) in Sepang.
Malindo Air, which was also a tenant at klia2, had moved its operations to KLIA effective from March 15 this year.
“The number of passengers per day departing from klia2 only coming from AirAsia averages to about 37,000 per day, and 45,000 per day during the peak periods ... if you include both arrivals and departure during the peak period you’re looking at around 80,000 passengers per day, so there is huge volume there,” said Aireen.
With the commencement of its inaugural flight to Yangon yesterday, AirAsia now services seven international destinations via its northern hub of Penang.
http://www.theedgemarkets.com/my/article/airasia-good-financial-position
Wednesday, March 16, 2016
Top 400 Billionaires’ Wealth Rises to $3.896 Trillion
The Bloomberg Billionaires Index takes measure of the world’s wealthiest people based on market and economic changes and Bloomberg News reporting. Each net worth figure is updated
===============================================================================
Daily Daily YtD Prev.
Rank Name US$ B $Chg %Chg $Chg Rank
===============================================================================
Top 400 Total $3,896 14.3B 0.4% -23.6B n/a
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 William Henry Gates III "Bill" $83.3 80.3M 0.1% -470.1M 1
2 Amancio Ortega Gaona $71.1 284.3M 0.4% -1.7B 2
3 Warren E Buffett $65.9 -219.1M -0.3% 3.6B 3
4 Carlos Slim Helu $55.2 -653.7M -1.2% 2.9B 4
5 Charles De Ganahl Koch $51.4 -48.0M -0.1% 3.2B 5
6 David Hamilton Koch $51.4 -48.0M -0.1% 3.2B 5
7 Jeffrey P Bezos "Jeff" $51.1 383.9M 0.8% -8.6B 7
8 Mark Elliot Zuckerberg $47.6 262.2M 0.6% 1.8B 8
9 Ingvar Kamprad $41.9 80.5M 0.2% 2.0B 9
10 Lawrence Joseph Ellison "Larry" $41.0 -174.5M -0.4% 1.3B 10
11 Lawrence E Page "Larry" $38.8 339.4M 0.9% -1.1B 11
12 Sergey Brin $38.0 217.7M 0.6% -1.2B 12
13 Bernard Arnault $34.8 221.7M 0.6% 2.9B 13
14 Liliane Bettencourt $34.4 189.2M 0.6% 1.3B 14
15 Jim C Walton $33.0 250.2M 0.8% 2.5B 15
16 Samuel Robson Walton $32.7 251.3M 0.8% 2.7B 16
17 Alice Louise Walton $32.2 250.4M 0.8% 2.7B 17
18 Jacqueline Badger Mars $31.4 123.2M 0.4% -913.7M 18
19 John Franklyn Mars $31.4 123.2M 0.4% -913.7M 18
20 Forrest Edward Mars Jr $31.4 123.2M 0.4% -913.7M 18
21 Wang Jianlin $29.5 624.1M 2.2% -7.0B 21
22 Li Ka-Shing $29.1 319.6M 1.1% -870.6M 22
23 Jack Yun Ma $27.9 -19.7M -0.1% -1.8B 23
24 Jorge Paulo Lemann $27.1 31.3M 0.1% -564.7M 24
25 Sheldon Gary Adelson $26.7 380.0M 1.4% 3.7B 25
26 Stefan Persson $25.8 270.4M 1.1% -397.6M 27
27 Philip H Knight "Phil" $25.7 251.3M 1.0% 380.9M 26
28 George Soros $24.4 n/a n/a n/a 28
29 Steve Ballmer $23.1 178.2M 0.8% -803.5M 29
30 Giovanni Ferrero $21.9 -21.4M -0.1% -489.0M 30
31 Mukesh D Ambani $21.4 33.3M 0.2% -213.4M 31
32 Georg F W Schaeffler $20.5 210.3M 1.0% -2.0B 34
33 Carl C Icahn $20.5 -72.8M -0.4% 564.8M 32
34 Hrh Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Al Saud $20.2 -287.0M -1.4% -4.7B 33
35 Dieter Schwarz $19.2 202.3M 1.1% 1.0B 35
36 Ma Huateng $19.2 597.0M 3.2% -56.4M 37
37 Leonardo Del Vecchio $18.9 -43.2M -0.2% -3.1B 36
38 Elaine Tettemer Marshall $18.1 -16.7M -0.1% 1.4B 38
39 Paul Gardner Allen $17.9 30.7M 0.2% -249.4M 39
40 Laurene Powell Jobs $17.6 177.8M 1.0% -852.7M 40
41 Dr Lee Shau Kee $17.2 471.0M 2.8% -319.6M 44
42 Len Blavatnik $17.1 -174.0M -1.0% -104.5M 41
43 Thomas Peterffy $16.9 -14.6M -0.1% -1.4B 43
44 Dilip Shantilal Shanghvi $16.8 -154.9M -0.9% 334.2M 42
45 Donald Leroy Bren $16.5 25.0M 0.2% n/a 45
46 Tadashi Yanai $16.5 787.8M 5.0% -1.7B 48
47 Michael S Dell $16.3 n/a n/a -1.5B 46
48 Alejandro Santo Domingo $16.1 -48.7M -0.3% 213.6M 47
49 Dr James Harris Simons "Jim" $15.5 n/a n/a n/a 49
50 Charles W Ergen "Charlie" $15.2 -117.3M -0.8% -1.7B 50
51 Serge Dassault $15.0 -116.0M -0.8% -882.9M 51
52 Alhaji Aliko Dangote $14.7 -150.4M -1.0% -543.3M 52
53 Robert Kuok Hock Nien $14.5 119.0M 0.8% 937.9M 54
54 Vladimir Potanin $14.4 -3.3M 0.0% -268.4M 53
55 Azim Hasham Premji $14.2 7.8M 0.1% -690.4M 55
56 Raymond T Dalio "Ray" $14.1 n/a n/a n/a 56
57 Ernesto Bertarelli $14.1 1.3M 0.0% -39.4M 57
58 Ronald Owen Perelman $14.0 -79.4M -0.6% 227.9M 58
59 Gerald Cavendish Grosvenor $13.9 n/a n/a -165.0M 59
60 Susanne Klatten $13.9 67.2M 0.5% -1.3B 60
61 Francois Pinault $13.4 25.2M 0.2% 311.4M 61
62 Leonid Mikhelson $13.4 5.9M 0.0% 429.7M 62
63 Stefano Pessina $13.3 57.8M 0.4% -403.8M 65
64 Robin Yanhong Li $13.2 19.8M 0.1% -450.1M 63
65 Viktor Vekselberg $13.1 83.0M 0.6% 451.9M 68
66 Henry Sy Sr $13.0 -169.6M -1.3% 572.2M 64
67 Pallonji Shapoorji Mistry $13.0 -44.4M -0.3% -848.6M 67
68 Joseph Yacoub Safra $13.0 -90.1M -0.7% 428.9M 66
69 Marcel Herrmann Telles $12.8 21.5M 0.2% -137.2M 69
70 George B Kaiser $12.7 17.1M 0.1% 268.1M 70
71 Alain Ernest Wertheimer $12.3 164.2M 1.4% 415.8M 71
72 Gerard Paul Phillipe Wertheimer $12.3 164.2M 1.4% 415.8M 71
73 John R Menard Jr $12.2 114.9M 1.0% -632.8M 74
74 Stefan Quandt $12.2 98.6M 0.8% -1.8B 73
75 Lukas Tyler Walton $12.1 81.8M 0.7% 940.4M 76
76 Mikhail Fridman $12.0 3.3M 0.0% -69.3M 75
77 Steven A Cohen "Steve" $12.0 n/a n/a -5.0M 77
78 Alexey Mordashov $12.0 207.9M 1.8% -303.3M 79
79 Hans Rausing $11.9 -11.8M -0.1% -250.2M 78
80 Lee Kun-Hee $11.8 200.3M 1.7% 120.4M 81
81 Petr Kellner $11.6 -85.4M -0.7% -371.0M 80
82 Shiv Nadar $11.6 23.5M 0.2% -563.9M 82
83 Leonard Alan Lauder $11.5 80.4M 0.7% 563.5M 83
84 Alisher Usmanov $11.4 -44.4M -0.4% -603.4M 85
85 Keith Rupert Murdoch $11.3 -9.2M -0.1% 93.5M 86
86 Charlene De Carvalho-Heineken $11.3 -130.7M -1.1% -189.6M 84
87 John Fredriksen $11.1 -0.7M 0.0% -24.2M 87
88 Elon R Musk $10.9 308.9M 2.9% -1.5B 93
89 Klaus-Michael Kuehne $10.9 74.0M 0.7% 22.7M 89
90 Carlos Alberto Sicupira $10.8 -7.7M -0.1% -109.9M 88
91 Iris Fontbona $10.8 99.9M 0.9% 499.1M 91
92 Kjeld Kirk Kristiansen $10.7 -38.8M -0.4% 2.3B 90
93 Dustin A Moskovitz $10.7 57.1M 0.5% 492.4M 92
94 Luis Carlos Sarmiento Angulo $10.6 0.2M 0.0% 272.9M 94
95 Karl Albrecht Jr $10.6 93.6M 0.9% 702.9M 97
96 Beate Heister $10.6 93.6M 0.9% 702.9M 97
97 David Alan Tepper $10.6 27.4M 0.3% -158.3M 96
98 Roman Abramovich $10.5 -11.0M -0.1% -876.3M 99
99 Philip F Anschutz $10.5 -0.4M 0.0% 88.3M 100
100 Georgina Hope Rinehart "Gina" $10.5 -98.0M -0.9% 783.8M 95
101 Prof Dr Hasso Plattner $10.5 95.5M 0.9% -85.3M 103
102 Samuel Irving Newhouse Jr "Si" $10.4 -52.8M -0.5% -298.5M 101
103 Dietrich Mateschitz $10.3 -112.8M -1.1% -1.2B 102
104 Masayoshi Son $10.3 186.1M 1.8% 155.6M 109
105 Dr Eric Emerson Schmidt $10.3 147.7M 1.5% -176.6M 107
106 Lakshmi N Mittal $10.2 69.4M 0.7% 815.8M 104
107 Cheng Yu-Tung $10.2 53.8M 0.5% -123.1M 108
108 Charoen Sirivadhanabhakdi $10.1 -42.5M -0.4% 1.0B 105
109 Stephen Allen Schwarzman $10.1 -54.3M -0.5% -277.4M 106
110 Liu Yongxing $10.0 176.3M 1.8% -374.9M 112
111 Mikhail Prokhorov $10.0 -3.2M 0.0% 30.5M 110
112 Alberto Bailleres Gonzalez $9.9 -17.1M -0.2% 605.8M 111
113 Dr Patrick Soon-Shiong $9.5 -3.8M 0.0% -728.0M 113
114 James H Goodnight "Jim" $9.5 59.1M 0.6% -974.7M 115
115 Donald Edward Newhouse $9.4 -52.8M -0.6% -298.5M 114
116 Micky Meir Arison $9.4 28.6M 0.3% -485.0M 116
117 Heinz Hermann Thiele $9.3 32.4M 0.3% -641.0M 117
118 Patrick Drahi $9.3 38.0M 0.4% 1.7B 118
119 John Alfred Paulson $9.2 27.5M 0.3% -857.3M 119
120 Dmitry Rybolovlev $9.2 50.1M 0.5% -54.1M 120
121 Kwok Ping-Luen "Raymond" $9.2 96.9M 1.1% 144.9M 121
122 Kwok Ping Kwong "Thomas" $9.1 96.6M 1.1% 94.2M 122
123 W G Galen Weston $9.0 32.2M 0.4% 698.1M 123
124 Yeung Kin-Man $9.0 360.3M 4.2% -843.7M 130
125 Mohammed Al Amoudi $9.0 5.2M 0.1% 312.8M 124
126 Jan Koum $8.9 -21.8M -0.2% 142.7M 125
127 Xavier Niel $8.8 77.3M 0.9% 678.6M 129
128 Vladimir Lisin $8.8 0.9M 0.0% 1.3B 127
129 Sara Mota De Larrea $8.8 -73.0M -0.8% 771.7M 126
130 Sergey Galitskiy $8.8 -13.7M -0.2% -238.8M 128
131 William Lei Ding $8.7 175.9M 2.1% -2.0B 132
132 Zong Qinghou $8.6 -3.9M 0.0% -793.6M 131
133 Dr Hui Ka Yan $8.5 156.6M 1.9% -1.1B 136
134 German Khan $8.5 26.8M 0.3% 301.3M 133
135 Tan Siok Tjien $8.5 73.1M 0.9% 1.7B 135
136 Charles C Butt $8.5 46.7M 0.6% -757.1M 134
137 Mohamed Bin Issa Al Jaber $8.3 2.1M 0.0% -16.6M 137
138 Harold G Hamm $8.3 36.9M 0.4% 1.3B 139
139 Dr Cyrus S Poonawalla $8.2 -2.6M 0.0% -1.9B 138
140 Takemitsu Takizaki $8.2 204.7M 2.6% -465.1M 144
141 Kwok Ping Sheung "Walter" $8.1 109.3M 1.4% -100.6M 142
142 Dr John C Malone $8.1 6.0M 0.1% -421.5M 140
143 Prof Dr Reinhold Wuerth $8.1 -1.0M 0.0% -274.0M 141
144 Leslie Herbert Wexner $8.0 21.4M 0.3% -299.7M 143
145 Theo Albrecht Jr $8.0 225.6M 2.9% 792.6M 153
146 Richard Qiangdong Liu $8.0 8.1M 0.1% -1.2B 145
147 R Budi Hartono $7.9 46.9M 0.6% 774.8M 147
148 Lau Luen Hung "Joseph" $7.9 136.5M 1.8% -1.1B 152
149 Carl Cook $7.9 60.5M 0.8% -144.3M 149
150 Johann Graf $7.8 n/a n/a 25.0M 148
151 Vagit Alekperov $7.8 -79.1M -1.0% 1.1B 146
152 Daniel Andrew Beal "Andy" $7.8 -21.5M -0.3% -1.0B 150
153 Gianluigi Aponte $7.7 36.9M 0.5% -1.4B 154
154 Eyal M Ofer $7.6 -114.2M -1.5% -417.0M 151
155 Michael Otto $7.6 37.6M 0.5% 157.8M 158
156 Michael Hartono $7.6 46.9M 0.6% 735.8M 159
157 Blair Kennedy Parry-Okeden $7.6 -8.3M -0.1% -77.6M 155
158 James Cox Kennedy "Jim" $7.6 -8.3M -0.1% -77.6M 155
159 Dr Thomas F Frist Jr $7.6 -12.4M -0.2% 611.5M 157
160 Woo Kwong-Ching "Peter" $7.5 77.1M 1.0% 107.1M 161
161 Dr Chanchai Ruayrungruang "Yan Bin" $7.5 -32.1M -0.4% -905.5M 160
162 He Xiangjian $7.4 102.4M 1.4% -1.0B 165
163 Eli Broad $7.4 0.1M 0.0% -29.6M 162
164 August Von Finck $7.3 -1.1M 0.0% 112.1M 163
165 Dr Lui Che-Woo $7.3 -32.0M -0.4% 354.0M 164
166 Suh Kyung-Bae $7.3 133.9M 1.9% -640.3M 166
167 Gennady Timchenko $7.1 35.8M 0.5% 558.9M 168
168 Lei Jun $7.1 42.4M 0.6% -2.9B 170
169 Abigail P Johnson "Abby" $7.1 -10.6M -0.1% -919.2M 167
170 Pierre M Omidyar $7.1 17.7M 0.2% -232.9M 169
171 Charles Gerald John Cadogan $7.1 n/a n/a -360.0M 171
172 Ludwig Merckle $7.1 101.9M 1.5% -333.2M 175
173 Sean N Parker $7.0 38.9M 0.6% 340.6M 173
174 Richard S Lefrak $7.0 -1.4M 0.0% -7.4M 172
175 Silvio Berlusconi $7.0 11.8M 0.2% 83.7M 174
176 Dr Christoffel H Wiese $6.8 -115.7M -1.7% 479.1M 176
177 Zhang Zhidong $6.8 217.3M 3.3% 1.1M 188
178 Paolo Mario Rocca $6.8 -54.0M -0.8% -307.4M 177
179 Bruce T Halle $6.8 -2.6M 0.0% 228.1M 179
180 Giorgio Armani $6.8 78.8M 1.2% -193.0M 183
181 Jean-Claude Decaux $6.7 27.8M 0.4% 593.7M 180
182 David Geffen $6.7 8.1M 0.1% -74.4M 181
183 Graeme Richard Hart $6.7 n/a n/a n/a 182
184 Sandra Ortega Mera $6.7 17.5M 0.3% -179.2M 184
185 Jack Crawford Taylor $6.7 -126.5M -1.9% -2.7B 178
186 Richard D Kinder "Rich" $6.7 38.0M 0.6% 1.1B 186
187 Sherry Brydson $6.6 17.6M 0.3% 285.8M 185
188 Mark V Shoen $6.6 43.2M 0.7% 234.1M 187
189 Andrey Melnichenko $6.6 109.6M 1.7% 522.7M 189
190 Eva Gonda Rivera $6.5 -25.3M -0.4% -132.3M 192
191 Simon Reuben $6.5 -52.8M -0.8% 760.8M 190
192 David Reuben $6.5 -52.8M -0.8% 760.8M 190
193 Richard B Cohen "Rick" $6.4 -21.4M -0.3% 289.2M 193
194 Harry Triguboff $6.4 n/a n/a n/a 194
195 Hansjoerg Wyss $6.4 -32.8M -0.5% -145.0M 195
196 Alexey Kuzmichev $6.3 27.4M 0.4% 232.2M 198
197 Lee Jae-Yong "Jay Y Lee" $6.3 -34.0M -0.5% -270.8M 197
198 Uday Suresh Kotak $6.3 -48.9M -0.8% -855.7M 196
199 Dr Gordon Earle Moore $6.3 -10.1M -0.2% -471.9M 200
200 Joern Rausing $6.3 -34.6M -0.6% 602.3M 199
201 Nicholas Frank Oppenheimer "Nicky" $6.2 60.1M 1.0% 110.7M 203
202 Arthur L Irving $6.2 -35.0M -0.6% -126.9M 201
203 Lu Guanqiu $6.2 197.5M 3.3% -2.1B 211
204 Enos Stanley Kroenke $6.2 -4.6M -0.1% 11.6M 202
205 Melker Schoerling $6.1 144.6M 2.4% -409.8M 216
206 Zhou Qunfei $6.1 246.2M 4.2% -1.6B 221
207 Travis C Kalanick $6.1 n/a n/a 1.1B 205
208 Garrett Camp $6.1 n/a n/a 1.1B 205
209 Dr Johann P Rupert $6.1 -29.2M -0.5% -185.9M 204
210 Kirsten Rausing $6.0 -36.0M -0.6% 653.5M 207
211 Finn Rausing $6.0 -36.0M -0.6% 653.5M 207
212 Nathan Kirsh "Natie" $6.0 19.7M 0.3% -274.1M 215
213 Charles R Schwab "Chuck" $6.0 -34.0M -0.6% -735.4M 209
214 Stephen M Ross $6.0 n/a n/a n/a 214
215 Eka Tjipta Widjaja $6.0 -18.1M -0.3% 1.0B 212
216 Majid Al Futtaim $6.0 -16.3M -0.3% -337.9M 213
217 Eduardo Luiz Saverin $6.0 31.4M 0.5% 274.7M 217
218 Dr Lucio C Tan $6.0 -55.0M -0.9% 276.7M 210
219 Dr Aloys Wobben $6.0 126.8M 2.2% -736.0M 223
220 Xu Shihui $6.0 59.5M 1.0% -532.2M 218
221 Christy R Walton $5.9 42.5M 0.7% 511.5M 220
222 Dr Desh Bandhu Gupta $5.9 20.5M 0.3% 16.1M 219
223 Micky Jagtiani $5.9 4.1M 0.1% 85.2M 222
224 Karl-Heinz Kipp $5.8 25.0M 0.4% -263.4M 225
225 Prof Dr Frederik Paulsen $5.8 35.7M 0.6% -655.1M 226
226 Andreas Von Bechtolsheim $5.8 -43.5M -0.7% -446.8M 224
227 Dietmar Hopp $5.8 56.2M 1.0% -26.1M 229
228 Diane M Hendricks $5.7 -30.8M -0.5% 463.9M 227
229 Heinrich Deichmann $5.7 128.3M 2.3% -147.8M 234
230 T Ananda Krishnan $5.7 -41.9M -0.7% -63.3M 228
231 Antonia Axson Johnson $5.7 29.0M 0.5% 106.4M 230
232 Hiroshi Mikitani $5.7 134.6M 2.4% -987.0M 239
233 James Allen Pattison "Jim" $5.7 -29.1M -0.5% 94.0M 231
234 Dr Wee Cho Yaw $5.7 27.2M 0.5% -57.7M 232
235 Hon Sir Michael David Kadoorie $5.6 42.1M 0.8% 44.8M 236
236 Kenneth Cordele Griffin $5.6 31.9M 0.6% -520.0M 235
237 Shari Arison $5.6 -1.0M 0.0% -247.0M 233
238 Margarita Louis-Dreyfus $5.6 13.9M 0.2% 1.1B 238
239 David Arthur Duffield $5.6 97.6M 1.8% -509.1M 246
240 Bidzina Ivanishvili $5.6 25.0M 0.5% -50.0M 240
241 Tan Sri Dato Lee Shin Cheng $5.6 -9.9M -0.2% 534.2M 237
242 Gwendolyn Sontheim Meyer $5.6 30.3M 0.5% 1.7B 241
243 Pauline Macmillan Keinath $5.6 30.3M 0.5% 1.7B 241
244 Whitney Macmillan $5.6 30.3M 0.5% 1.7B 241
245 Tsai Eng-Meng $5.5 25.3M 0.5% -51.8M 247
246 Ray Lee Hunt $5.5 -11.0M -0.2% -225.1M 244
247 Goh Cheng Liang $5.5 131.2M 2.5% -805.5M 255
248 George W Lucas Jr $5.5 44.2M 0.8% -232.9M 248
249 Tan Sri Dato Dr Teh Hong Piow $5.4 -67.7M -1.2% 222.9M 245
250 Liu Yonghao $5.4 -5.8M -0.1% -32.4M 249
251 Oleg Deripaska $5.4 89.8M 1.7% -446.6M 258
252 Curt G Engelhorn $5.4 n/a n/a -125.0M 252
253 Kumar Mangalam Birla $5.4 9.6M 0.2% -284.7M 253
254 Richard Charles Branson $5.4 -9.8M -0.2% -75.9M 251
255 Emmanuel Besnier $5.4 -25.6M -0.5% -132.6M 250
256 James K Irving "Jk" $5.4 0.3M 0.0% 529.0M 254
257 Ralph Lauren $5.3 8.5M 0.2% 4.8M 257
258 John Albert Sobrato $5.3 n/a n/a -25.0M 256
259 Lorenzo Servitje Sendra $5.3 62.7M 1.2% 378.5M 259
260 Yang Huiyan $5.2 233.6M 4.7% 524.7M 278
261 Shahid R Khan $5.2 6.1M 0.1% 780.6M 263
262 Lin Yu-Lin $5.2 0.4M 0.0% -101.5M 261
263 Chen Wai Wai "Vivien" $5.2 96.3M 1.9% 74.6M 271
264 Gustaf Douglas $5.2 -66.9M -1.3% 20.7M 260
265 Tamara Hughes Gustavson "Tammy" $5.2 57.9M 1.1% 184.7M 269
266 Stef Wertheimer $5.2 25.0M 0.5% n/a 268
267 Frank P Lowy $5.1 -45.6M -0.9% 194.8M 262
268 Joao Roberto Marinho $5.1 -23.6M -0.5% 688.5M 264
269 Roberto Irineu Marinho $5.1 -23.6M -0.5% 688.5M 264
270 Maria-Elisabeth Schaeffler-Thumann $5.1 52.6M 1.0% -604.3M 270
271 Jose Roberto Marinho $5.1 -23.4M -0.5% 683.2M 267
272 Bertil Hult $5.1 -69.1M -1.3% 69.1M 266
273 Margaretta J Taylor $5.0 -5.5M -0.1% 68.4M 274
274 James Cox Chambers $5.0 -5.5M -0.1% 68.4M 274
275 Katharine J Rayner $5.0 -5.5M -0.1% 68.4M 274
276 Abdullah Bin Ahmed Al Ghurair $5.0 -32.3M -0.6% -321.2M 273
277 Edward Crosby Johnson III "Ned" $5.0 5.3M 0.1% -618.3M 277
278 Ricardo Benjamin Salinas Pliego $5.0 -46.6M -0.9% -672.4M 272
279 Petr Aven $5.0 27.8M 0.6% 116.7M 282
280 Trevor D Rees-Jones $5.0 -9.0M -0.2% 21.0M 279
281 Steven Allan Spielberg $5.0 -0.4M 0.0% -44.8M 284
282 Theo Mueller $5.0 -15.0M -0.3% -73.3M 280
283 Leonard Norman Stern $5.0 -25.0M -0.5% 25.0M 281
284 John P Grayken $4.9 -28.8M -0.6% -53.7M 283
285 Dennis R Washington $4.9 57.5M 1.2% 167.2M 288
286 Robert E Rich Jr "Bob" $4.9 -9.1M -0.2% -14.6M 285
287 Joseph C Lewis "Joe" $4.9 2.5M 0.1% -278.8M 289
288 Jeffery D Hildebrand "Jeff" $4.9 -63.7M -1.3% -376.0M 287
289 Lim Kok Thay $4.9 -76.4M -1.5% 703.9M 286
290 Prof David Cheriton $4.8 -22.5M -0.5% -337.6M 290
291 Richard Devos Sr $4.8 95.7M 2.0% 293.3M 296
292 Brian Acton $4.8 21.5M 0.4% 187.6M 294
293 Theodore N Lerner "Ted" $4.8 n/a n/a n/a 293
294 Joseph C Tsai $4.8 -40.9M -0.9% -539.6M 292
295 Sumner M Redstone $4.8 32.0M 0.7% 199.5M 297
296 Vincent Bollore $4.8 129.4M 2.8% -739.4M 312
297 Erivan Karl Haub $4.8 -69.2M -1.4% -83.6M 291
298 Stan F Druckenmiller $4.7 n/a n/a n/a 295
299 Gautam S Adani $4.7 15.2M 0.3% -752.0M 298
300 John P Sall $4.7 29.6M 0.6% -387.4M 301
301 James S Davis "Jim" $4.7 31.4M 0.7% -196.3M 302
302 Terrence M Pegula "Terry" $4.7 n/a n/a n/a 300
303 Sir Philip Green $4.7 52.7M 1.1% -591.0M 306
304 Laurence Graff $4.7 65.3M 1.4% 15.4M 309
305 Wang Chuan-Fu $4.7 159.8M 3.5% -871.6M 317
306 Guenther Fielmann $4.7 28.9M 0.6% -34.2M 305
307 Elisabeth Mohn "Liz" $4.7 1.3M 0.0% 65.3M 304
308 Charles Francis Dolan $4.7 -6.9M -0.1% -60.4M 303
309 Chung Mong-Koo $4.7 -55.0M -1.2% 49.3M 299
310 Kenneth B Dart $4.7 22.2M 0.5% -236.0M 310
311 Lynn Schusterman $4.7 -2.3M 0.0% -60.3M 308
312 Dr Emanuele Saputo "Lino" $4.6 -29.5M -0.6% 794.2M 307
313 George R Roberts $4.6 -1.9M 0.0% -273.1M 311
314 J Christopher Reyes "Chris" $4.6 58.7M 1.3% 51.4M 315
315 M Jude Reyes $4.6 58.7M 1.3% 51.4M 315
316 Guenter Herz $4.6 -2.1M 0.0% 73.4M 314
317 Li Tzar Kai "Richard" $4.6 -14.5M -0.3% -7.4M 313
318 Zhang Shiping $4.6 87.4M 2.0% 207.0M 322
319 Daniela Herz $4.6 -2.1M 0.0% 48.4M 318
320 James Dyson $4.5 83.8M 1.9% -1.2B 325
321 Gong Hongjia $4.5 88.6M 2.0% -678.9M 333
322 Troels Holch Povlsen $4.5 44.5M 1.0% -652.6M 328
323 Pierre Bellon $4.5 4.2M 0.1% 449.3M 324
324 Mary Alice Dorrance Malone $4.5 -18.6M -0.4% 613.2M 320
325 Maria Helena Moraes Scripilliti $4.5 -41.0M -0.9% 346.7M 319
326 Charles Bartlett Johnson $4.4 -14.0M -0.3% -118.0M 323
327 Samuel Zell "Sam" $4.4 -9.0M -0.2% -109.9M 326
328 Vikram Lal $4.4 -49.7M -1.1% 609.8M 321
329 Leon David Black $4.4 2.3M 0.1% 171.5M 332
330 Rupert Harris Johnson Jr $4.4 -14.3M -0.3% 126.9M 330
331 Axel Oberwelland $4.4 -2.0M 0.0% -74.7M 334
332 Ermirio Pereira De Moraes $4.4 -40.1M -0.9% 335.6M 329
333 Walter Faria $4.4 -42.7M -1.0% 288.0M 331
334 Wolfgang Herz $4.4 14.4M 0.3% -65.8M 335
335 Michael Herz $4.4 14.4M 0.3% -65.8M 335
336 Wei Jianjun $4.4 127.2M 3.0% -1.7B 341
337 Dieter Schnabel $4.4 -79.2M -1.8% -92.7M 327
338 Hui Wing Mau $4.4 135.5M 3.2% -477.1M 343
339 Ralph Dommermuth $4.3 51.5M 1.2% -402.0M 340
340 Jeffrey S Skoll "Jeff" $4.3 4.8M 0.1% 20.8M 337
341 Dr Bernard C Sherman "Barry" $4.3 -11.5M -0.3% -1.1B 338
342 Ng Chee Tat "Philip" $4.3 5.1M 0.1% -142.1M 339
343 Guo Guangchang $4.3 81.3M 1.9% -681.1M 355
344 Pedro Moreira Salles $4.2 -3.9M -0.1% 548.8M 344
345 Dannine Duncan Avara $4.2 -12.5M -0.3% -111.0M 342
346 Walther Moreira Salles Jr $4.2 0.5M 0.0% 548.3M 345
347 Fernando Roberto Moreira Salles $4.2 0.0M 0.0% 547.8M 345
348 Masatoshi Ito $4.2 113.2M 2.8% -236.0M 361
349 John A Catsimatidis $4.2 1.1B 33.8% 980.2M 489
350 Tan Kim Choo $4.2 9.1M 0.2% -42.9M 353
351 Magdalena Martullo-Blocher $4.2 -17.1M -0.4% 329.0M 348
352 Milane Duncan Frantz $4.2 -12.5M -0.3% -136.0M 349
353 Scott Daniel Duncan $4.2 -12.5M -0.3% -136.0M 349
354 Joao Moreira Salles $4.2 -24.5M -0.6% 523.3M 345
355 Edward S Lampert $4.2 -15.1M -0.4% -87.6M 351
356 Ng Chee Siong "Robert" $4.2 4.9M 0.1% -142.9M 354
357 Robert B Rowling $4.2 91.3M 2.2% 125.2M 362
358 Randa Duncan Williams $4.2 -13.1M -0.3% -150.8M 352
359 David K R Thomson $4.2 11.8M 0.3% 44.6M 356
360 Nassef Onsi Naguib Sawiris $4.2 39.8M 1.0% -624.9M 358
361 Andrey Guryev $4.1 -19.5M -0.5% 245.3M 357
362 Wang Wenyin $4.1 -3.4M -0.1% -307.3M 359
363 Andre Serenus Hoffmann $4.1 11.9M 0.3% -276.3M 364
364 Thomas Joseph Morris "Tom" $4.1 -2.2M -0.1% -296.5M 363
365 Juan Roig Alfonso $4.1 168.5M 4.3% 148.2M 382
366 Alexander Otto $4.1 29.3M 0.7% -1.6M 367
367 Rahel Blocher $4.1 -42.1M -1.0% 304.0M 360
368 James Douglas Packer $4.1 4.7M 0.1% 4.2M 366
369 Henry Roberts Kravis $4.1 -1.8M 0.0% -152.6M 365
370 Enrique Ramon Coppel Luken $4.0 275.6M 7.3% 88.3M 404
371 George Siao Kian Ty $4.0 -4.4M -0.1% 239.2M 368
372 Wang Wei $4.0 48.1M 1.2% -44.9M 372
373 Denis O’Brien Jr $4.0 -16.0M -0.4% 265.0M 369
374 John Paul Dejoria $4.0 7.6M 0.2% -68.6M 370
375 Isak Andic Ermay $4.0 10.8M 0.3% -149.0M 371
376 Pankaj R Patel $4.0 33.0M 0.8% 186.8M 376
377 Vera Michalski-Hoffmann $4.0 30.8M 0.8% -219.6M 378
378 Maja Hoffmann $4.0 30.8M 0.8% -219.6M 378
379 Dr Hans-Peter Wild $4.0 24.2M 0.6% 107.5M 377
380 Quek Leng Chan $4.0 -9.3M -0.2% 24.0M 374
381 Bruno L Schroder $4.0 -10.5M -0.3% -408.3M 373
382 Benu Gopal Bangur $4.0 85.3M 2.2% -13.6M 387
383 Ursula Engelhorn $4.0 n/a n/a -75.0M 380
384 Walter Scott Jr $3.9 0.0M 0.0% 187.5M 381
385 Prince Sultan Bin Mohammed Al Kabeer $3.9 -60.5M -1.5% -430.6M 375
386 Peter J Thomson $3.9 12.5M 0.3% -104.7M 384
387 Taylor Lynne Thomson $3.9 12.1M 0.3% 44.9M 383
388 Siegfried Meister $3.9 11.4M 0.3% 636.7M 385
389 Victor Rashnikov $3.9 106.0M 2.8% 715.6M 398
390 Ma Jianrong $3.9 16.4M 0.4% -412.1M 386
391 Thomas M Schmidheiny $3.9 59.2M 1.5% -610.3M 392
392 Frits J D Goldschmeding $3.9 14.9M 0.4% -504.7M 388
393 Stephen Bechtel Jr $3.9 25.0M 0.7% 3.3M 391
394 Randal J Kirk $3.8 -15.2M -0.4% 201.8M 389
395 Peter Andreas Thiel $3.8 0.7M 0.0% 5.5M 393
396 David M Green $3.8 -15.0M -0.4% 109.7M 390
397 Dr Fredrik Lundberg $3.8 22.2M 0.6% -224.0M 402
398 Issad Rebrab $3.8 -11.4M -0.3% -375.6M 394
399 Traudl Engelhorn-Vechiatto $3.8 n/a n/a -75.0M 397
400 Odd Reitan $3.8
Wednesday, March 9, 2016
This 4,000-year old financial indicator says that a major crisis is looming
Over 4,000 years ago during Sargon the Great’s reign of the Akkadian Empire, it took 8 units of silver to buy one unit of gold.
This was a time long before coins. It would be thousands of years before the Lydians in modern day Turkey would invent gold coins as a form of money.
Back in the Akkadian Empire, gold and silver were still used as a medium of exchange.
But the prices of goods and services were based on the weight of metal, and typically denominated in a unit called a ‘shekel’, about 8.33 grams.
For example, you could have bought 100 quarts of grain in ancient Mesopotamia for about 2 shekels of silver, a weight close to half an ounce in our modern units.
Both gold and silver were used in trade. And at the time the ‘exchange rate’ between the two metals was fixed at 8:1.
Throughout ancient times, the gold/silver ratio kept pretty close to that figure.
During the time of Hamurabbi in ancient Babylon, the ratio was roughly 6:1.
In ancient Egypt, it varied wildly, from 13:1 all the way to 2:1.
In Rome, around 12:1 (though Roman emperors routinely manipulated the ratio to suit their needs).
In the United States, the ratio between silver and gold was fixed at 15:1 in 1792. And throughout the 20th century it averaged about 50:1.
But given that gold is still traditionally seen as a safe haven, the ratio tends to rise dramatically in times of crisis, panic, and economic slowdown.
Just prior to World War II as Hitler rolled into Poland, the gold/silver ratio hit 98:1.
In January 1991 as the first Gulf War kicked off, the ratio once again reached 100:1, twice its normal level.
In nearly every single major recession and panic of the last century, there was a sharp rise in the gold/silver ratio.
The crash of 1987. The Dot-Com bust in the late 1990s. The 2008 financial crisis.
These panics invariably led to a gold/silver ratio in the 70s or higher.
In 2008, in fact, the gold/silver ratio surged from below 50 to a high of roughly 84 in just two months.
We’re seeing another major increase once again. Right now as I write this, the gold/silver ratio is 81.7, nearly as high as the peak of the 2008 financial crisis.
This isn’t normal.
In modern history, the gold/silver ratio has only been this high three other times, all periods of extreme turmoil—the 2008 crisis, Gulf War, and World War II.
This suggests that something is seriously wrong. Or at least that people perceive something is seriously wrong.
There are so many macroeconomic and financial indicators suggesting that a recession is looming, if not an all-out crisis.
In the US, manufacturing data show that the country is already in recession (more on this soon).
Default rates are rising; corporate defaults in the US are actually higher now than when Lehman Brothers went bankrupt back in 2008.
These defaults have put a ton of pressure on banks, whose stock prices are tanking worldwide as they scramble to reinforce their balance sheets against losses.
I just had a meeting with a commercial banker here in Sydney who told me that Australian regulators are forcing the bank to increase its already plentiful capital reserves by over 40% within the next several months.
This is an astonishing (and almost impossible) order.
The regulators wouldn’t be doing that if they weren’t getting ready for a major storm. So even the financial establishment is planning for the worst.
Good times never last forever, especially with governments and central banks engineering artificial prosperity by going into debt and printing money.
These tactics destroy a financial system. And the cracks are visibly expanding.
So while the gold/silver ratio isn’t any kind of smoking gun, it is an obvious symptom alongside many, many others.
Now, the ratio may certainly go even higher in the event of a major banking or financial crisis. We may see it touch 100 again.
But it is reasonable to expect that someday the gold/silver ratio will eventually fall to more ‘normal’ levels.
In other words, today you can trade 1 ounce of gold for 80 ounces of silver.
But perhaps, say, over the next two years the gold/silver ratio returns to a more historic norm of 55. (Remember, it was as low as 30 in 2011)
This means that in the future you’ll be able to trade the 80 ounces of silver you acquired today for 1.45 ounces of gold.
The final result is that, in gold terms, you earn a 45% “profit”. Essentially you end up with 45% more gold than you started with today.
So bottom line, if you’re a speculator in precious metals, now may be a good time to consider trading in some gold for silver
This was a time long before coins. It would be thousands of years before the Lydians in modern day Turkey would invent gold coins as a form of money.
Back in the Akkadian Empire, gold and silver were still used as a medium of exchange.
But the prices of goods and services were based on the weight of metal, and typically denominated in a unit called a ‘shekel’, about 8.33 grams.
For example, you could have bought 100 quarts of grain in ancient Mesopotamia for about 2 shekels of silver, a weight close to half an ounce in our modern units.
Both gold and silver were used in trade. And at the time the ‘exchange rate’ between the two metals was fixed at 8:1.
Throughout ancient times, the gold/silver ratio kept pretty close to that figure.
During the time of Hamurabbi in ancient Babylon, the ratio was roughly 6:1.
In ancient Egypt, it varied wildly, from 13:1 all the way to 2:1.
In Rome, around 12:1 (though Roman emperors routinely manipulated the ratio to suit their needs).
In the United States, the ratio between silver and gold was fixed at 15:1 in 1792. And throughout the 20th century it averaged about 50:1.
But given that gold is still traditionally seen as a safe haven, the ratio tends to rise dramatically in times of crisis, panic, and economic slowdown.
Just prior to World War II as Hitler rolled into Poland, the gold/silver ratio hit 98:1.
In January 1991 as the first Gulf War kicked off, the ratio once again reached 100:1, twice its normal level.
In nearly every single major recession and panic of the last century, there was a sharp rise in the gold/silver ratio.
The crash of 1987. The Dot-Com bust in the late 1990s. The 2008 financial crisis.
These panics invariably led to a gold/silver ratio in the 70s or higher.
In 2008, in fact, the gold/silver ratio surged from below 50 to a high of roughly 84 in just two months.
We’re seeing another major increase once again. Right now as I write this, the gold/silver ratio is 81.7, nearly as high as the peak of the 2008 financial crisis.
This isn’t normal.
In modern history, the gold/silver ratio has only been this high three other times, all periods of extreme turmoil—the 2008 crisis, Gulf War, and World War II.
This suggests that something is seriously wrong. Or at least that people perceive something is seriously wrong.
There are so many macroeconomic and financial indicators suggesting that a recession is looming, if not an all-out crisis.
In the US, manufacturing data show that the country is already in recession (more on this soon).
Default rates are rising; corporate defaults in the US are actually higher now than when Lehman Brothers went bankrupt back in 2008.
These defaults have put a ton of pressure on banks, whose stock prices are tanking worldwide as they scramble to reinforce their balance sheets against losses.
I just had a meeting with a commercial banker here in Sydney who told me that Australian regulators are forcing the bank to increase its already plentiful capital reserves by over 40% within the next several months.
This is an astonishing (and almost impossible) order.
The regulators wouldn’t be doing that if they weren’t getting ready for a major storm. So even the financial establishment is planning for the worst.
Good times never last forever, especially with governments and central banks engineering artificial prosperity by going into debt and printing money.
These tactics destroy a financial system. And the cracks are visibly expanding.
So while the gold/silver ratio isn’t any kind of smoking gun, it is an obvious symptom alongside many, many others.
Now, the ratio may certainly go even higher in the event of a major banking or financial crisis. We may see it touch 100 again.
But it is reasonable to expect that someday the gold/silver ratio will eventually fall to more ‘normal’ levels.
In other words, today you can trade 1 ounce of gold for 80 ounces of silver.
But perhaps, say, over the next two years the gold/silver ratio returns to a more historic norm of 55. (Remember, it was as low as 30 in 2011)
This means that in the future you’ll be able to trade the 80 ounces of silver you acquired today for 1.45 ounces of gold.
The final result is that, in gold terms, you earn a 45% “profit”. Essentially you end up with 45% more gold than you started with today.
So bottom line, if you’re a speculator in precious metals, now may be a good time to consider trading in some gold for silver
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)