Ok, so this hasnt been thought out fully and I typed this on my blackberry late in the night while on the tube. But what the heck, if I cant witter on in my blog, when where else can i do it?
I keep on hearing about how we have to cut costs because we have to improve
our margins as there is greater competition.
Cost cutting requires a wee bit of imagination, some discipline and a beady
eye out on the bottom line. It is amazing how many people have an admirable
dedication on the top line growth but do not think about the bottom line
growth.
And typically, bottom line inflation lags and is of a greater magnitude
than the top line inflation. So you start getting higher costs right when
you can least afford them.
Counter-intuitively and this requires courage for people to push hard, best
time to think about costs is when there is no cost pressure. That's where
your margins are fatter in good time while you have scope to cut in bad
times, unlike your competitors.
So what you need to think about is to think 3 years ahead and change the
cost structure of your business, not cost cuts. Some examples
Invest in a workflow process and system which works on an exception basis
with a workforce which is location independent.
Can you pay your middle office people based upon error rates?
Why do you need your middle and back office people in with the traders? For
that matter why can't they work from home? For that matter, if you have
security and compliance sorted, why can't you devise a system such as The
Seti project, with temporary workers docking on to process, get paid by the
transaction, and dock off?
Think about changing your cost structure, not muck around with shipping a
process here and there, anybody can do that, what's the special thing that
you are coming up with?
A generational jump. Remember that 80 percent of a products lifetime
revenue is earned by the early innovators, 20 percent is squabbled over by
the 80 percent who follow.
So whether you are providing white label trading, operations, processes, IT
processes, market making, what have you, to reduce the cost of work, think
about how to change the structure of your cost and try to turn the
structure inside out, sideways, mutate it, don't mess about the edges.
All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!
Friday, November 30
UK Schools Minister Jim Knight is an idiot!!
UK Schools Minister Jim Knight is an idiot. I think he should ask for his school fees back as he is clearly an imbecile. Oh I forgot he studied in the same grotty school system. Moron.
This is what he said when asked about the pathetic performance of the UK in the recent PISA survey,'we are well above average, but we know we need to do more to be truly world class'
Now that's imbecilic. When I go for a walk with Bill Gates, on average we both are billionaires but I have to do more.
Sighs, and our school system is in the hands of this imbecile?
All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!
This is what he said when asked about the pathetic performance of the UK in the recent PISA survey,'we are well above average, but we know we need to do more to be truly world class'
Now that's imbecilic. When I go for a walk with Bill Gates, on average we both are billionaires but I have to do more.
Sighs, and our school system is in the hands of this imbecile?
All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!
Curious Similarities between Ian Smith and Robert Mugabe
Both Robert Mugabe and Ian Smith were hero's in their respective wars, fighting against oppression, fasicm, racism, discrimination and and and. Both lost to their own people, both turned into monsters and both are now considered to be to the worst human beings in the world. How tragically ironic!
All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!
All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!
A wonderful display of photography
This is a friend of mine, Louisa Nikolaidou. We worked together at EFG Eurobank in the dim and distant past, then she went off to help in the Athens Olympics (the recent one, not the old one!, we are not THAT old!) and then became an acclaimed photographer. Take a look at her work, its absolutely amazing!. I mean, both her and I have camera's, but its like the difference between Leonardo da Vinci and my little girls paintings.
All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!
All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!
Red Hen
Once upon a time, on a farm in Texas , there was a little red hen who scratched about the barnyard until she uncovered quite a few grains of wheat. She called all of her neighbours together and said, "If we plant this wheat, we shall have bread to eat. Who will help me plant it?"
"Not I," said the cow.
"Not I ," said the duck.
"Not I," said the pig.
"Not I," said the goose.
"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen and so she did. The wheat grew very tall and ripened into golden grain.
"Who will help me reap my wheat?" asked the little red hen.
"Not I," said the duck.
"Out of my classification," said the pig.
"I'd lose my seniority," said the cow.
"I'd lose my unemployment compensation," said the goose.
"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen, and so she did. At last it came time to bake the bread.
"Who! will help me bake the bread?" asked the little red hen.
"That would be overtime for me," said the cow.
"I'd lose my welfare benefits," said the duck.
"I'm a dropout and never learned how," said the pig.
"If I'm to be the only helper, that's discrimination," said the goose.
"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen.
She baked five loaves and held them up for all of her neighbours to see. They wanted some and, in fact, demanded a share. But the little red hen said, "No, I shall eat all five loaves."
"Excess profits!" cried the cow.
"Capitalist leech!" screamed the duck. (Baa baa Boxer)
"I demand equal rights!" yelled the goose.
The pig just grunted in disdain.
And they all painted "Unfair!" picket signs and marched around and around the little red hen, shouting obscenities.
Then a government agent came. He said to the little red hen, "You must not be so greedy."
"But I earned the bread," said the little red hen.
"Exactly," said the agent. "That is what makes our free enterprise system so wonderful. Anyone in the barnyard can earn as much as he wants. But under our modern government regulations, the productive workers must divide the fruits of their labour with those who are lazy and idle."
And they all lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked, "I am grateful, for now I truly understand."
But her neighbours became quite disappointed in her. She never again baked bread, because she joined the "party" and got her bread free. And all the Democrats smiled. 'Fairness' had been established. Individual initiative had died, but nobody noticed; perhaps no one cared .. so long as there was free bread that "the rich" were paying for.
British Muslims issue guidelines to fight extremism
Very good steps here, something that shows how far we have come and still how far we have to go. In other words, the very fact that these basic common sense modern day and age principles have to be enumerated shows how far we are, and the fact that these basic principles are still facing opposition shows how far we have to go.
Read and worry but hope as well! Some extracts:
Leaders of Britain's two million Muslims unveiled a new set of guidelines Thursday that aim to root out extremism, promote a culture of "civic responsibility" and foster women's rights in the country's mosques, Islamic centers and Muslim schools.
The 10-point "code of conduct" will now go to public discussion among Muslim groups, with the aim of producing a final version by March. The proposals would commit all Muslim organizations accepting it to "actively combat all forms of violent extremism" within the community and to "promote civic responsibility of Muslims in wider society."
The specifics of the charter would commit mosques to stricter vetting of all imams and other religious leaders, including a check for criminal records. In addition, it would require mosques, and other Muslim religious institutions, to commit to "open, democratic, accountable management," including making public the details of the raising and spending of funds.
It would also bind mosques to adopt written policies on equality of opportunity, racial and religious harassment, and child protection. Perhaps most controversially, from the standpoint of conservative Muslims, it would also commit them to establish "women's committees" to encourage the wider participation of women in the life of mosques.
In particular, mosques and other Muslim institutions would be expected to "ensure that forced marriages are understood and publicized as un-Islamic," to condemn "violence in matrimonial or domestic matters," and to "mediate in matrimonial conflict resolution." Mosques would also be expected to have "uniform procedures" for carrying out marriages, and standard documents for certifying them.
The new charter would provide for random spot checks of mosques and other Muslim institutions to verify whether they were conforming to the charter, and commit them to participate in "interfaith activities" with other religious groups.
The Muslim organizations would be required to cooperate with other agencies, including the police and non-Muslim community groups, to bring about what the proposals referred to as a "reconciliation in fractured relationships" between Muslins and non-Muslims.
The prospects for an EU-India bilateral trade agreement
This article talks about an EU-India bilateral trade agreement but says that the prospects are uncertain. Damn right they are uncertain. You see, trade agreements are usually confused by free trade agreements or customs unions. They aren't free, they aren't mainly to do with trade and they usually don't show any signs of unions. They are not, they basically entrench bad economic habits on both sides. But for what's its worth, a good overview.
Read and ponder. Some extracts:
Prospects for an agreement appear good but there are potential obstacles. The optimism comes form the fact that the EU is India’s largest trade partner and is an important provider and buyer of services and FDI. Moreover, as far as goods trade is concerned, there is little overlap in trade structures or comparative advantage between India and the EU, so liberalisation should trigger little of the sort of sectoral readjustment that can be so painful politically. Likewise, neither party is likely to ask for difficult agricultural liberalization – another standard source of conflict. More positively and perhaps decisively both sides are anxious to increase the access that their service provider have to each others’ market.
Potential obstacles stem from India’s domestic politics. There is a general suspicion of trade liberalisation in the ruling Congress party (as opposed to the government), and downright hostility to trade from other parties in the governing coalition such as the communists. The European Commission wishes the free trade agreement to address deeper integration issues such as competition policy, the rights of foreign investors, open government purchasing practices as well as environmental, social and human rights clauses. The latter in particular may cause problems in India, which may suspect that such clauses may create pretexts for future protection. India may also simply consider them patronizing given that Indian democracy is older than that of many EU member states.
The final stumbling block may be an unbridgeable expectation gap. The EU’s trade strategy commits it to ambitious and far-reaching agreements. India’s current idea of a free trade agreement is the India-Singapore deal which, though “comprehensive” in name, contains rather less liberalisation than the EU desires.
Finally, an EU-India agreement will inevitably be complicated given the very different stages of development and the size and intricacy of the two economies. The sheer complexity of the negotiations may mean they are not completed by the time of the next Indian elections. They may get held up and perhaps repudiated by any new government, particularly if dominated by left wing parties.
Thursday, November 29
Gandhi's "Seven Blunders of the World" That Lead to Violence
The Seven Blunders of the World is a list that Mahatma Gandhi gave to his grandson Arun Gandhi, written on a piece of paper, on their final day together, not too long before his assassination. In his final years, the elder Gandhi kept his grandson close at hand and set aside an hour every day to be alone with the boy.
Blunders of the World
---------------------------------------
1) Wealth without work
2) Pleasure without conscience
3) Knowledge without character
4) Commerce without morality
5) Science without humanity
6) Worship without sacrifice
7) Politics without principle
Points to Ponder
An old Cherokee told his grandson about a battle that goes on inside people. He said, "My son, the battle is between two "wolves" inside us all. One is Evil. It is anger, envy, jealousy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority and ego. The other is Good. It is Joy, Peace, Love, Hope, serenity, Humility, Kindness, Benevolence, Empathy, Generosity, Truth, Compassion and Faith.
The grandson thought about it for a minute and then asked his grandfather: "Which wolf wins?" The old Cherokee simply replied, "The one you feed."
Ahmadinejad is a Zionist Agent!!!! I have it confirmed from an email!
I had a rather interesting debate earlier on a list where this article was circulated. The article was so laughable, missing facts etc. that I found it very amusing, but unfortunately, it went down like a lead balloon. My comments on that when challenged that it was serious is :
#1 Oh! I didn’t realise there was a serious point to this, is there? Would love to hear that as I seem to have missed it. Lets see, some unsubstantiated rumours of him being a Zionist agent, some aspects relating to his politics, some aspects relating to his ministerial career, his wife, Royal, some more of his wife, some trips to morocco, links with Israeli state visits. I found the entire essay very amusing indeed. Obviously written with a tongue firmly in cheek, taking the mickey out of people. There are books out there about the great pyramids and Napoleon as well.
then I was told that there is a point that jews hate Iran. To which I replied
#2 Thanks for that, but I am again not seeing the connection between being a Jew and threatening Iran. See here for example: http://tinyurl.com/36hh59. Jews want to stay in Iran and love Iran. And threatening Iran has a long pedigree in French Foreign Policy. Its explicit support for Iraq is well known. Then again, Kouchner is a hard leftist and a member of a very august organisation who strangely enough, supported the invasion of Iraq. While Sarko didn̢۪t, confusing or what?
Then I was told that I was insulting Muslims. So I responded:
I insulted the views of Canadian Muslims? How so? By laughing at the amusing logic of an Egyptian journalist writing about a French President in an Egyptian Weekly Newspaper about Iran, his wife, riots in France and then further discussing the reaction of Jews (both pro and cons) to Iran? Now I really do not see the connection. You are right mate J. The problem IS with my understanding!
And my final comment in response to probability of Sarko being an ex- Mossad agent was:
Thank you for your comment. I am not ruling out the fact that Sarko could be a Zionist agent. Anything is possible but whether it is probable or not has to be argued. What I found amusing was that the journo started well, and then veered off into a debate and discussion about his wife. What on earth is the connection between that? His personal life? Or why has his inclusion of Muslims in his own cabinet despite vociferous opposition been considered? Or his attempts to dramatically increase investments in the banaleius? Or his proposals to break apart the problems of employment of the black north African Muslims? And so on and so forth? If one has to argue that a President is a Zionist agent, then one has to do better than to point to somebody̢۪s marital problems, exclude huge chunks of current French history (both political and economic), and so on and so forth. And why would we automatically believe that being Jews means that you are antithetical to Iran? I gave a counter example of Jews who love Iran. What exactly is the journalist trying to prove? But that is exactly why I think the journalist (being the international editor of a good Arab newspaper) wrote this in a sarcastic manner and taking the Mickey. Which journalist would write something while excluding so many blindingly obvious facts? No other explanation but that he was being sarcastic! :) That is why I said I found it amusing. But let us let it pass, if he meant it in earnest, then I am curious because it does not square with too many facts. If he meant it in amusement, then well, I chuckled. Have a great weekend folks!
Then again Indymedia seems to have published this story from that paragon of Journalistic Accuracy, PressTV (Its an Iranian Government Owned propaganda rag, i mean, it hired Yvonne Ridley, lol, how pathetic can you get???, and that tells you the standards of that outlet). That outlet, is not only staff challenged but is also linguistically challenged. It tried to translate this story from Le Figaro. Now, how on earth it managed to trace the Le Figaro story to saying that,
French daily Le Figaro has revealed the French leader once worked for the Zionist regime as a sayan, Hebrew for 'collaborator'. Ex-Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky says sayans, who perform many roles, are Jewish citizens of other nationalities assisting Mossad. Le Figaro claimed that French police officials managed to keep secret a letter, which exposed Sarkozy's past participation in espionage activities for Mossad. The letter fixed Sarkozy's alleged spying activities as far back as 1983
All this hoo haa seems to be based upon an email sent from an internet cafe which has no corresponding proof or corroborating evidence. And THIS is what is getting people excited?
Well, I suppose conspiracy theorists will blame the zionists for a wrongful translation! :) (you can use this site to get a translation of the Le Figaro article)
BTW: I got a unsigned email from an internet cafe whichI am going to send to IndyMedia and Al Ahram that President Ahmadinejad is actually a Zionist agent because he is obviously taking Iran in a direction to be nuked and is ruining Iran's economy. Sufficient proof, eh?
All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!
#1 Oh! I didn’t realise there was a serious point to this, is there? Would love to hear that as I seem to have missed it. Lets see, some unsubstantiated rumours of him being a Zionist agent, some aspects relating to his politics, some aspects relating to his ministerial career, his wife, Royal, some more of his wife, some trips to morocco, links with Israeli state visits. I found the entire essay very amusing indeed. Obviously written with a tongue firmly in cheek, taking the mickey out of people. There are books out there about the great pyramids and Napoleon as well.
then I was told that there is a point that jews hate Iran. To which I replied
#2 Thanks for that, but I am again not seeing the connection between being a Jew and threatening Iran. See here for example: http://tinyurl.com/36hh59. Jews want to stay in Iran and love Iran. And threatening Iran has a long pedigree in French Foreign Policy. Its explicit support for Iraq is well known. Then again, Kouchner is a hard leftist and a member of a very august organisation who strangely enough, supported the invasion of Iraq. While Sarko didn̢۪t, confusing or what?
Then I was told that I was insulting Muslims. So I responded:
I insulted the views of Canadian Muslims? How so? By laughing at the amusing logic of an Egyptian journalist writing about a French President in an Egyptian Weekly Newspaper about Iran, his wife, riots in France and then further discussing the reaction of Jews (both pro and cons) to Iran? Now I really do not see the connection. You are right mate J. The problem IS with my understanding!
And my final comment in response to probability of Sarko being an ex- Mossad agent was:
Thank you for your comment. I am not ruling out the fact that Sarko could be a Zionist agent. Anything is possible but whether it is probable or not has to be argued. What I found amusing was that the journo started well, and then veered off into a debate and discussion about his wife. What on earth is the connection between that? His personal life? Or why has his inclusion of Muslims in his own cabinet despite vociferous opposition been considered? Or his attempts to dramatically increase investments in the banaleius? Or his proposals to break apart the problems of employment of the black north African Muslims? And so on and so forth? If one has to argue that a President is a Zionist agent, then one has to do better than to point to somebody̢۪s marital problems, exclude huge chunks of current French history (both political and economic), and so on and so forth. And why would we automatically believe that being Jews means that you are antithetical to Iran? I gave a counter example of Jews who love Iran. What exactly is the journalist trying to prove? But that is exactly why I think the journalist (being the international editor of a good Arab newspaper) wrote this in a sarcastic manner and taking the Mickey. Which journalist would write something while excluding so many blindingly obvious facts? No other explanation but that he was being sarcastic! :) That is why I said I found it amusing. But let us let it pass, if he meant it in earnest, then I am curious because it does not square with too many facts. If he meant it in amusement, then well, I chuckled. Have a great weekend folks!
Then again Indymedia seems to have published this story from that paragon of Journalistic Accuracy, PressTV (Its an Iranian Government Owned propaganda rag, i mean, it hired Yvonne Ridley, lol, how pathetic can you get???, and that tells you the standards of that outlet). That outlet, is not only staff challenged but is also linguistically challenged. It tried to translate this story from Le Figaro. Now, how on earth it managed to trace the Le Figaro story to saying that,
French daily Le Figaro has revealed the French leader once worked for the Zionist regime as a sayan, Hebrew for 'collaborator'. Ex-Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky says sayans, who perform many roles, are Jewish citizens of other nationalities assisting Mossad. Le Figaro claimed that French police officials managed to keep secret a letter, which exposed Sarkozy's past participation in espionage activities for Mossad. The letter fixed Sarkozy's alleged spying activities as far back as 1983
All this hoo haa seems to be based upon an email sent from an internet cafe which has no corresponding proof or corroborating evidence. And THIS is what is getting people excited?
Well, I suppose conspiracy theorists will blame the zionists for a wrongful translation! :) (you can use this site to get a translation of the Le Figaro article)
BTW: I got a unsigned email from an internet cafe whichI am going to send to IndyMedia and Al Ahram that President Ahmadinejad is actually a Zionist agent because he is obviously taking Iran in a direction to be nuked and is ruining Iran's economy. Sufficient proof, eh?
All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)