Uncategorized
A world cup for the red-green giants (only)
Even before soccer’s biggest show – the FIFA World Cup – has even started, the public is already divided. The facebook group lobbying for the boycott of Singtel-Starhub world cup packages has gathered storm over the past week and, surely, this is no mere rhetoric because succumbing to the high prices will only prove that Edward Ying is right. He infamously said, Singaporeans have an insatiable appetite for football and will pay the price. Whilst he meant this literally (i.e. subscribers will pay more fees), there is a figurative element to it as, to concur with this increase simply sets the precedent for the escalation of prices in future – unless we rethink our market system. Thus, this unsavoury predicament is no longer just about the 2010 World Cup, but the duopoly market system now lay bare.
So, how did things culminate to this extent in the first place? Why did the conventional wisdom of market liberalisation fail to bring about the benefits of competition for the consumer dollar?
Well, it all began with the bidding for the English Premier League (EPL) broadcasting rights between the two telcos. While Singtel refused to disclose its bid for the rights, the fact that the bidding was concluded within one round can only imply that it must have had a large winning margin. And since Starhub‘s hefty bid was $250 million in 2007, analysts had speculated the 2010 bid by Singtel to be about $300 to $400 million.
Even though Singtel has offered an affordable subscription price of $23 for now, the contracts for this package are only up till 2011. It is rather evident that consumers are likely to shoulder the initial losses Singtel would have incurred for the first year of ‘affordable subscription – by way of an upward revision in prices.
In any case, the governing body of international soccer, Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), seeing the two teleco giants fight tooth and nail, has exploited their willingness to pay exorbitant prices by jacking up the price so high that neither telecos could in essence pay for it. But as a cosmopolitan self-proclaimed first-world country, the notion of Singapore being relegated to the sidelines in the broadcasting of the 2010 World Cup is preposterous. So, as the ‘kiasu‘ syndrome eventually kicked in, the government decided to act – albeit, very belatedly. At the very least, by preventing exclusive carrier content, the government has forestalled any similar outbidding exercise as with the EPL broadcasting rights.
But there is a pervading question – is Singapore ill-suited for a duopoly system? In fact, the topic of the extent to which market liberalisation should occur has emerged frequently since the middle of 2000’s, and this question is precisely the reason why this World Cup fiasco should be taken seriously.
With regard to the viability of a duopoly – where two companies hold major shares in the market, the first few years when SBS Transit started operating the North-East Line (NEL) and SMRT took on bus routes is telling. The promise of competitive pricing was impeccably fraudulent as while each company diverted resources to secondary markets it was unfamiliar with, it still monopolised its share over its core area. This unique model of duopoly in the public transport system still gave them the free reign over their respective turfs.
In another form of duopoly at work, Starhub used to have exclusivities over the sports channels available but Singtel’s recent coup has led to uncertainties on its pricing for the forthcoming EPL season – which was even before the ridiculous pricing for the world cup packages were revealed. No doubt, the only certainty is that the fight for leverage over certain programs is at its worst right now.
The point though is that by simplifying the market mechanisms without considering the nature of the goods is bound to ultimately victimise the consumers. A duopoly system only works insofar as appropriate government regulation is undertaken as to harness public goods, a free market cannot be left to its own devices. The problems that America’s economy is facing are manifestations of the exigencies of such self-regulating behaviour. In this particular case, the additional actor – FIFA – complicates the situation, and its opportunistic exploitation of the loophole in the system would be the first of many to come – unless appropriate government regulation takes place.
Most unacceptable of all to many is Singtel’s arrogant statement, through its chief of content and media services, Edward Ying, that “it’s only $1, less than 1 cup of coffee, I think they can afford it”. As John Chua, creator of the aforementioned facebook group, says, “Their greed is evident for all to see. Starhub and Singtel are clearly going to recover a lot of whatever amount that they paid for the rights with advertising/sponsorships and the $1888-$28888 that they are charging per TV in public outlets. I certainly don’t see any reason to give in and reward them for these sorts of behaviours since there are plenty of others ways to catch the world cup without signing up.”
One industry analyst from consultancy firm Frost & Sullivan also adds, “The EPL bidding war had a knock-on effect on the costs of the World Cup broadcast rights.” However, the telecos’ image conflates into a deteriorating one of arrogance and greed as they repeatedly deny that the high prices are due to a spill over effect from the EPL outbidding.
For now though, consumers can choose to grit their teeth and burn a hole in their pockets (yet again) but this will be at the risk of the perpetuation of similar blatant exploitation – because it will always be “only $1, less than 1 cup of coffee, Iink they can afford it”. Or, we can, for once, say enough is enough and take the road less travelled (in Singapore, at least) for once – boycott. Surely this is the wiser choice as the losses will not only be Singtel’s and Starhub‘s but for Temasak Holdings as a whole (since it is a major stakeholder in both companies). It is clear that the government has already realised the need to regulate the markets – from the decision to disallow exclusive carrier content in March – but the boycott would nevertheless drill the point through that consumers cannot be held ransom to ridiculous pricing, and that there are limits to abusing the willingness of fans to fork out a premium for their passion.
________________________________________________
By Tng Ying Hui
Images courtesy of the facebook group Mass Boycott Starhub/Singtel Overpriced World Cup Package
The group presently counts 18,815 fans and continues to grow exponentially
________________________________________________________________
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2023/03/26202010/TOC_newlogo_small.webp)
Indonesia
Miss Universe cuts ties with Indonesia chapter after harassment allegations
The Miss Universe Organization severs ties with Indonesia franchise due to harassment claims. Malaysia edition canceled.
Women allege body checks before pageant. Investigation launched. Safety prioritized.
Indonesia winner to compete in November finale. Height requirement controversy.
WASHINGTON, UNITED STATES — The Miss Universe Organization has cut ties with its Indonesia franchise, it announced days after allegations of sexual harassment, and will cancel an upcoming Malaysia edition.
In the complaint, more than a half dozen women said all 30 finalists for Miss Universe Indonesia were unexpectedly asked to strip for a supposed body check for scars and cellulite two days before the pageant’s crowning ceremony in Jakarta.
Their lawyer said Tuesday that five of the women had their pictures taken.
“In light of what we have learned took place at Miss Universe Indonesia, it has become clear that this franchise has not lived up to our brand standards, ethics, or expectations,” the US-based Miss Universe Organization posted Saturday night on social media site X, formerly known as Twitter.
It said that it had “decided to terminate the relationship with its current franchise in Indonesia, PT Capella Swastika Karya, and its National Director, Poppy Capella.”
It thanked the contestants for their bravery in coming forward and added that “providing a safe place for women” was the organization’s priority.
Jakarta police spokesman Trunoyudo Wisnu Andiko said Tuesday that an investigation into the women’s complaint has been launched.
The Indonesia franchise also holds the license for Miss Universe Malaysia, where there will no longer be a competition this year, according to the New York-based parent organizer.
In a lengthy statement posted to Instagram, Indonesia franchise director Capella denied involvement in any body checks.
“I, as the National Director and as the owner of the Miss Universe Indonesia license, was not involved at all and have never known, ordered, requested or allowed anyone who played a role and participated in the process of organizing Miss Universe Indonesia 2023 to commit violence or sexual harassment through body checking,” she wrote.
She added that she is against “any form of violence or sexual harassment.”
The Jakarta competition was held from 29 July to 3 August to choose Indonesia’s representative to the 2023 Miss Universe contest, and was won by Fabienne Nicole Groeneveld.
Miss Universe said it would make arrangements for her to compete in the finale, scheduled for November in El Salvador.
This year’s Indonesia pageant also came under fire for announcing a “significant change in this (year’s) competition guidelines” with the elimination of its minimum height requirement after it had crowned a winner.
In its statement, the Miss Universe Organization said it wanted to “make it extremely clear that there are no measurements such as height, weight, or body dimensions required to join a Miss Universe pageant worldwide.”
— AFP
Malaysia
A Perodua service centre in Kuantan, Malaysia went viral for its strict dress code, Perodua responds
A dress code for vehicle servicing? A Malaysian car brand’s service centre dress code signage has puzzled netizens, raising queries about the need for attire rules during a routine service.
The manufacturer responded with an official statement after a flurry of comments, seeking to clarify and apologize.
MALAYSIA: A dress code signage positioned at a service centre belonging to a prominent Malaysian car brand has sparked bewilderment among Malaysian netizens, who question the necessity of adhering to attire guidelines for a simple vehicle servicing.
The signage explicitly delineates clothing items that are deemed unsuitable, including sleeveless tops, short skirts, abbreviated pants, and distressed jeans.
The car manufacturer swiftly found itself flooded with comments from both inquisitive and irked Malaysian netizens. This surge in online activity prompted the company to issue an official statement aimed at clarifying the situation and extending an apology.
In a post that gained significant traction on the social media platform, politician Quek Tai Seong of Pahang State, Malaysia, shared an image to Facebook on Monday (7 Aug).
The image showcased a dress code sign prominently displayed at a Perodua Service Centre in Kuantan. Within the post, Quek posed the question: “Is this dress code applicable nationwide, or is it specific to this branch?”
The signage reads, “All customers dealing with Perodua Service Kuantan 1, Semambu, are requested to dress modestly and appropriately.”
Adding visual clarity to these guidelines, the sign features illustrative graphics that explicitly outline clothing items deemed unacceptable, including sleeveless tops, short skirts, short pants, and ripped jeans.
Delineating the specifics of the dress code, the signage stipulates that male visitors are expected to don shirts accompanied by neckties, opt for long pants, and wear closed shoes.
Conversely, female visitors are advised to don long-sleeved shirts, full-length skirts, and closed-toe footwear.
Perodua’s dress code sparks online uproar
Following the rapid spread of the post, Perodua’s official Facebook page found itself inundated with comments from both intrigued and frustrated Malaysian netizens, all seeking clarifications about the newly surfaced dress code policy.
Amidst the flurry of comments, numerous incensed netizens posed pointed questions such as, “What is the rationale behind the introduction of such regulations by the management? We demand an explanation.”
Another netizen expressed their dissatisfaction, arguing against the necessity of the rule and urging Perodua to take inspiration from the practices of other 4S (Sales, Service, Spare Parts, and Survey) automotive dealerships.
A concerned Facebook user chimed in, advocating for a more lenient stance, asserting that attempting to dictate customers’ clothing choices might not be in the company’s best interest.
Someone also commented in an angry tone, “Oi what is this? Going there for car service, not interview or working, right.”
As the discourse unfolded, it became evident that while some inquiries carried genuine weight, others chose to inject humor into the situation, playfully remarking, “If I wanted to buy a Myvi, I should buy or rent a formal attire first.”
“I sell economy rice at a hawker centre, I have never worn a long sleeve shirt and a tie… I guess I will not buy a Perodua car then.”
“I guess they will not serve those who wear short pants.”
Perodua addresses dress code controversy
As reported by Chinese media outlet Sin Chew Daily News, the manager of Kuantan’s Perodua Service Centre had acknowledged that the images on the dress code signage were misleading.
In response, the manager divulged that discussions had transpired with the head office, leading to the prompt removal of the signage to prevent any further misconceptions.
The manager clarifies, “We do encourage visitors to adhere to the dress etiquette, but we won’t go to the extent of restricting their choice of attire.”
He also revealed that currently, no complaints have been directly received from the public.
However, feedback from certain customers was relayed through Perodua’s agents.
Perodua also released an official statement by chief operating officer JK Rozman Jaffar on Wednesday (9 Aug) regarding the dress code on their official Facebook page.
The statement stated the dress code etiquette is not aligned with their official guidelines and they are currently conducting an official investigation on the matter followed by corrective measures to avoid the same incident from happening.
Perodua also extends its apologies for any inconvenience caused.
-
Opinion4 days ago
Singaporean voters and the ‘Battered Wife Syndrome’
-
Diplomacy3 days ago
India PM Narendra Modi meets with PM Lawrence Wong; Four MoUs signed
-
Food3 days ago
NTU stall food prices questioned after parent pays S$6.30 for meal
-
Politics2 days ago
PAP adopts SDP policies after criticizing them: Dr Chee urges Singaporeans to see through tactics
-
Civil Society5 days ago
CIVICUS Monitor labels Singapore as ‘repressed’ for crackdown on civic freedoms
-
Opinion6 days ago
Is the shuttle bus service at Marine Parade town cluster just a S$1 million political ad campaign?
-
Economy4 days ago
IRAS reports S$80.3 billion in tax revenue for FY2023/24, a 17% increase from the previous year
-
Parliament4 days ago
Workers’ Party to question Govt on Mobile Guardian breach and entry of extremist preacher in upcoming parliamentary sitting