Bursa's New Transparency Move

Some will obviously say that the proposed amendments are reactionary to the more recent shenanigans in the markets. I am all for better transparency by listed firms, but we have to draw a line between credible information and over-regulation. Things can get petty and paper work can become too onerous and may even fail to achieve the objectives of better transparency.



Changes in directors, CEOs and CFOs - This is OK and acceptable.

Changes in external auditors and independent advisers - This is OK but may need to be extended to include an opinion from the external auditors and independent advisers as to why they were changed or asked to resign or were themselves voluntarily withdrawing from the positions.

Pledging of shares by controlling shareholders - Very good move, and it should include shares pledged to investment houses outside of the country.

Grounds for selection of independent directors / why a director is independent - This is total bullshit and asinine. Waste of time.

Improvements in clarity and analysis of quarterly reports - Good move but make it standardised so companies do not have to guess.

Annual reports to have 5 year financial highlights - Many listed firms already doing this. Good move nonetheless.

Deviation in utilisation of proceeds - Yes but should have a materiality clause as well.

Announcement or termination of corporate proposals and impact - Yes.

Immediacy in results of AGM/EGM - Yes for sure because business reporters can no longer cover the many AGMs or EGMs effectively, there are too many of them. This is important.


---------------------

Star Biz KUALA LUMPUR: Proposed amendments to Bursa Malaysia’s listing requirements and the introduction of the Corporate Disclosure Guide (CD Guide) are set to prod listed companies into revealing more details about key developments, including changes of directors, chief executive officers (CEOs), chief financial officers (CFOs), external auditors and independent advisers.

The revamp also covers disclosure rules for quarterly and annual reports, pledging of shares by controlling shareholders, termination of corporate proposals and voting results of shareholder meetings (see table). Some of these proposed improvements are seen as possible remedies to recent cases of poor corporate governance and stinginess with information.

In a media release yesterday, Bursa Malaysia said the CD Guide and the suggested changes to the listing requirements were aimed at promoting further transparency, quality and efficiency of the Malaysian capital market.

Said chief regulatory officer Selvarany Rasiah: “The proposed amendments are part of the exchange’s ongoing efforts to enhance the regulatory framework for listed issuers to ensure the competitiveness and attractiveness of Bursa Malaysia as a listing and investment destination.

“Maintenance of market integrity remains our key focus in formulating the proposed amendments, and in so doing, we strive to strike a careful balance between enhancing market regulation and promoting business efficacy.”

To come up with the proposals, the exchange took into account industry feedback, findings and observations from supervision and monitoring activities, stakeholder engagement, and international standards.

In a move to improve the quality of the stewardship of listed companies, the stock exchange plans to make it mandatory for a listed company to give its grounds for appointing a director or for nominating him for election.

“This includes the reasons why the listed issuer is of the view that the director has the character, experience, integrity, competence and time to effectively discharge his role as a director of the listed issuer.

In the case of an appointment of an independent director, we propose the listed issuer also sets out the reasons why the listed issuer considers the independent director as being ‘independent’,” says Bursa Malaysia in a consultation paper issued yesterday, which sets out the proposed amendments to the listing requirements.

A second consultation paper, also released yesterday, invites public feedback on the draft CG Guide. Bursa Malaysia said this consultation paper was meant to clarify the disclosure requirements set out in the listing requirement and to illustrate how the disclosure requirements should be applied. It also set out best practices for establishing policies and procedures to enable listed issuers to fulfil their disclosure obligations.

“The proposed CD Guide seeks to provide greater clarity and guidance to help listed issuers in better understanding and complying with their disclosure obligations under the listing requirements,” said Selvarany in the media release.

In addition, if the new disclosure rules are implemented, the companies will have to provide extra information in their quarterly and annual reports so as to enable investors to better understand the companies’ financial performance.

One proposal is to replace the performance reviews in the notes to quarterly reports with detailed analyses that set out material factors affecting the companies’ earnings and revenue. The idea is to eliminate cookie-cutter reviews that state the obvious. Bursa Malaysia has also proposed that the listing requirements prescribe certain items that ought to be incorporated in the income and cash flow statements in the quarterly reports.

Another interesting proposal is the requirement that the listed companies disclose the reasons for the resignation or change of directors, CEOs, CFOs, external auditors and independent advisers. This is partly to enable the detection of red flags, if any.

“Such disclosure would be particularly pertinent in instances where it arises from irregularities taking place in the listed issuer,” said Bursa Malaysia in the consultation paper on the proposed amendments to its listing requirements.

The deadline for submitting written comments on the two consultation papers, which can be downloaded from Bursa Malaysia’s website, is Aug 19.

“We expect diverse views on the consultation papers,” Selvarany told StarBiz. “We keep a very open mind. We want all constructive feedback. There may be some issues that we have not considered and we are prepared to take on board the relevant comments.”

Ball Talk Cock or Talk Cock Ball or Talk Ball Cock

Who has time to talk about business and stocks currently? Of course its the World Cup talk and how you are running out of excuses to get medical cert or sick leave.

The vuvuzelas will be big in EPL next season, because the England team plays like the vuvuzelas, makes a lot of noise but is pathetically and increasingly boring and annoying the more they play in the tournament.

This Brazil is not like the Brazil of old. This Brazil seems to have drunk a lot of Weizenbock, Klosch and Bock as their defence is BMW-solid.

Argentina is playing like the eventual winners, in spite of having Maradona as the coach - goes to show you how insignificant a role a coach plays to a team, just ask Capello.

South Korea, Japan and even North Korea did Asia proud, and was David Beckham masquerading as a Japanese player when they scored the two brilliant free kicks?

The French should be barred from the next World Cup so that they can have 8 years to think about what it means to be in a World Cup and what it means to play for your country.

I have a new nickname for Fernando Torres, I call him "Samson" now. He's no fucking good when you cut off his hair.



Best goal so far, Luis Suarez's (Uruguay) second goal against the Koreans.

Why is it that the game have 3 referees and we STILL always get goals that should not have been given (for offside / handball) and we get goals not given that should have been (crossed the line). It would be OK if the occurrence was once every 20 games, but its happening once every other game. C'mon, when there is available technology and its not too intrusive, USE IT - here, I agree, is where the US games are a lot smarter and better.

Mind you, Blatter said that the game is about controversies, ... BULLSHIT, if it is, then use only one referee and the person should be a non-neutral referee as well. For example, Brazil plays Spain, and you appoint an Argentine referee. Now you get all the controversies you want. Look at the American games, they use the best technology for aiding the umpires, and still they have sufficient controversies leftover. Go resign la Blatter, the only thing you have in common with football is your first name (ala Sepp Maier).

Now to the Jabulani ball, I call it the Cristiano Ronaldo Ball because it flies through the air even if you just tap it lightly. Why do you tinker with the ball every World Cup? Obviously its a marketing gimmick. It almost never happens in other games. Scoring was down by 16 goals after the first round compared to the 2006 World Cup. How much was due to the increased difficulty to control the ball?



Herein lies the conspiracy theory. Look at who has scored the most (disregard the Portugal / North Korean match). Apparently the Germans had a few months to play with the Jabulani balls (this line would be really funny if there was actually someone named Jabulani). The German team is good but seriously, not great, but look at how effective they were when finishing their shots, they were so precise and effective. Look at the 4 goals each against Australia and England.

Hence Germany could be a good dark horse even though its still just #5 probably in odds to win the World Cup now, ... behind Brazil, Argentina, Spain and the Netherlands. If they really have a strong familiarity with the ball, they may well need only a few live shooting chances to score, while the rest will need more chances. For example, Brazil may convert at 15% which means they will score once for every 6.6 chances. While Germany may have a 35% conversion rate owing to their better ball familiarity, thus may only need less than 3 live chances to get a goal.

Monetary Authority of Singapore Tries To Sue Pheim

Morningstar ranked Pheim ASEAN Emerging Companies Growth Fund ranked No. 1 for the 1-year, 3-year, 7-year, 10-year and 14-year periods for the Morningstar Category ASEAN Equity Funds as at June 2009.

First, let me say that I like CK Tan a lot, I think he is quite a brilliant fund manager. Besides being an outstanding long term outperformer, I also absolute share his view on the local market, this was uttered by Tan some 13 years ago: Pheim Asset Management CEO Tan Chong Koay believes that a buy-and-hold strategy is not appropriate for Malaysia's volatile market. Tan states that investors need to bet on the sharp swings of the market if they are to succeed in Malaysia.

It is being closely watched in the investment community, as Tan is well-known in fund management circles. Also, the case touches on the practice of “window-dressing” where big investors may try to ramp up or push down share prices — a key concern at the year-end when the value of a fund is determined.

Pheim Malaysia's case is it had already invested in the company when it was floated on the stock exchange earlier in the year. Its investment committee was keen to buy more United Envirotech shares, on the back of its success in investing in Hyflux. There were three funds in question — but under Malaysian rules, each fund could not hold more than 10 per cent of foreign (non-Malaysian) stocks. So it was only after these three funds had sold off some Singapore stocks on Dec 28, that the firm was able to buy into United Envirotech. Pheim Malaysia argues that it was a genuine investor, believing the shares were undervalued in 2004.

My views in brackets.

UET shares are the subject of a High Court lawsuit. The Monetary Authority of Singapore is suing Tan Chong Koay and his Malaysian fund Pheim Asset Management for alleged false trading in UET shares in December 2004.

Justice Lai Siu Chiu heard evidence yesterday from former UOB Kay Hian broker Tang Boon Siah, who said he received 'discretion' orders from Pheim Malaysia to buy about $100,000 of UET shares on Dec 29, 30 and 31, 2004 and filled these orders slowly, and mostly at the end of each trading day, because the stock was illiquid.

Examined by Pheim's lawyer Foo Maw Shen of Rodyk & Davidson, Mr Tang said he mostly lifted offers from the sell queue and waited as long as he could between trades so prospective sellers might appear. Even then he was unable to completely fill the order, but the price changes on each trading day did not exceed 20 per cent, he said. (Filling an illiquid order is a very difficult task, the broker did the right stuff, waited till end of the day before taking out the sellers queue, and he also ensured that it did not exceed 20% price movement daily. (Nothing sinister here).

Mr Tang said he kept in frequent telephone contact with Mr Tan on Dec 30 and 31, 2004 to update the latter on the status of the market. Mr Tan is represented in the case by Senior Counsel Michael Hwang. MAS, represented by Senior Counsel Cavinder Bull of Drew & Napier, alleges Mr Tan and Pheim created a false market in UET shares by their purchases, especially when timed so close to the end of the year. The purchases were also made mostly at the end of each trading day. (Mr. Bull is obviously deluded as to why shares had to be done mainly at the end of the day, this is to prevent other speculative buyers jumping in thus driving the shares up even more. By definition, a false market is WHEN YOU LITERALLY CONTROLS THE BUYERS SIDE AND THE SELLERS SIDE - if Phiem really did try to create a false market, then by all means the genuine sellers would dump their shares when the share price moved up day by day, Pheim was not selling).

The purchases caused the share price to close significantly higher and created a false and misleading appearance in the market, Mr Bull argued. This contravened Section 197(1)(b) of the Securities and Futures Act, he said. (OMG, MAS and Mr. Bull, why bother with this frivolous and naive lawsuit even. It was not a one day affair, it was spread out over 3 days. Did it amount to trying to close the share price at a certain level, or was it due to a genuine attempt to buy more shares).

Mr Tan and Pheim deny the accusations, saying the purchases were legitimate commercial transactions. Former HSBC Securities managing director Christopher Chong is expected to take the stand as an MAS expert witness on Monday when the hearing resumes. The defendants have called Nels Radley Friets - chairman of the Singapore Exchange and Catalist disciplinary committees, but appearing in his private capacity as their expert witness.

Aug. 28 (Bloomberg) -- Singapore’s central bank sued Pheim Asset Management Pte Chief Executive Officer Tan Chong Koay and the fund manager’s Malaysian unit for manipulating the shares of a water treatment company.

Tan and Pheim Asset Management Sdn. bought almost 90 percent of the traded shares of Singapore-based UET from Dec. 29 to Dec. 31, 2004, according to a statement presented to Singapore’s High Court by the Monetary Authority of Singapore's lawyers Drew & Napier LLC yesterday.

That created a “false or misleading appearance” of the market and the company’s stock, Cavinder Bull, a lawyer with Drew & Napier, said in the statement. The share purchase raised the net asset value of Pheim’s accounts, triggering outperformance bonuses of S$50,790 ($35,218) and an additional management fee of S$115, lifting the reputation of the fund manager, Bull said in the statement. (This is so laughable. A performance bonus of nearly S$61,000. Can someone please clarify what is Tan's net worth in 2004? I mean, the "reasonable man" defense here would tear this to shreds).

Pheim and Tan wouldn’t have been motivated by the “insignificant” amounts, according to a court statement from their lawyers. They “had no intention to create a false or misleading appearance,” according to the statement. United Envirotech shares were undervalued and the purchases were “part of a legitimate and genuine investment strategy,” it said.

UET price movements during that period were “a reflection of genuine demand and supply,” and the stock was “illiquid” and “volatile,” according to the statement. Pheim bought the shares for 38.4 Singapore cents to 43.9 Singapore cents each in December 2004. The shares climbed 17 percent from Dec. 29 to Dec. 31 that year.

“This was not the conduct of a genuine buyer seeking to buy shares at the lowest possible price,” the central bank said in its court filing. “Such a genuine buyer would have spread out the purchases of a thinly traded stock in order to avoid spikes in the prices.” (Not necessarily as the record should show that even as prices went higher with each progressive day, there were no excited sellers of the shares or else Pheim would have had the opportunity to buy a lot more shares. It was obvious that the shares were tightly held. MAS might as well GO AND SUE THE SHAREHOLDERS OF UTC WHO DID NOT SELL THEIR SHARES when Pheim started to buy the shares aggressively, does the fact that they did not sell to an irrational share price rise amount to stupidity or an act to collude with Pheim to allow the share prices to go even higher??).

Tan will call Nels Friets, chairman of the disciplinary committee of Catalist, the small-caps board of the SGX, as an expert witness in his defense. The central bank has called Christopher Chong, former managing director of HSBC Securities Pte, as its expert witness. Tan couldn’t immediately be reached for comment. The central bank declined to comment on on-going legal proceedings. Tan and Pheim may be fined between S$50,000 and S$2 million if found guilty, according to the court filing.

Pheim, founded by Tan in 1994, manages more than US$1 billion and counts the GIC and Malaysia’s Employee Provident Fund among its clients, according to its Web site. Tan, who has offices in Singapore and Malaysia, once jokingly said that Pheim was a made-up word which means Please Help Everyone Invest Money.

The case is Monetary Authority of Singapore and Tan Chong Koay, Pheim Asset Management Sdn Bhd., 658/2008/P in the Singapore High Court.

MAS should have a lot more things on their plate than to go for somebody like Pheim. Such a waste of resources and time.

p/s photos: Eri Otoguro

Return of The Sovereign Wealth Funds

Sovereign wealth funds squirreled away like frightened dogs feeling the full effects of the financial meltdown. Many have been ridiculed as having overpaid for many of their purchases, jumping on the financial bandwagon with abandon. Well, they are bound to be back. The return of foreign exchange reserve accumulation and the increase in commodity prices suggest that sovereign wealth funds may again receive more capital as sovereign governments seek a higher return on their assets. The reduction in foreign exchange reserve growth and low returns on risky assets has reduced the inflows to and value of sovereign wealth funds, government investment funds.

How Much New Capital?


• Central banks manage about $7 trillion in assets, mostly fixed income. China accounts for over $2 trillion of that total, Japan $1 trillion and Russia, $400 billion.
• SWFs now manage under $2 Trillion in a range of asset classes with Oil funds accounting for 3/4. Launch of several new funds, increase in assets, changing strategies of others contributed to SWF prominence in 2007. High oil revenues, exchange rate, reserves policies meant they received even more funds this year (mostly commodity funds). Yet losses on investments eroded their assets under management in 2008
• Petrodollar investors (including the private sector) faced an asset decline of almost 2% in 2008 from 2009 as investment losses subtracted from record inflows. Asian sovereign investors, central banks, sovereign funds added to their holdings by about 8%, mostly due to record Chinese accumulation. Both stood at close to $5 trillion at the end of 2008.
• Reduction in the oil price and slowing capital inflows to emerging markets reduced inflows to sovereign wealth funds after August 2008 while equity and alternative asset class losses likely eroded past investment gains meaning sovereign wealth funds may actually manage less today than they did a year ago despite record inflows to oil funds for much of this year. Going forward, the rate of growth of sovereign investors might slow considerably.
• In Q1 2009, Sovereign funds had the lowest level of foreign purchases since late 2005 with the funds from Abu Dhabi being most active. In Q1 2009, there were already signs that the trend of funds investing at home is beginning to subside.
• Central banks are switching to treasuries from agencies. Central bank purchases in q109, look to exceed central bank purchases in the Q104 when Japan was investing what then was considered a huge sum in the Treasury market.
• Even as governments receive fewer inflows they may privilege liquid assets needed to support their financial sector and provide stimulus to other sectors, thus diverting diversification plans. However funds that privilege domestic economic development may continue to make significant purchases.

Future Growth Patterns

• SWF portfolios will reach $10 trillion by 2015 (previous estimate $12T) . The funds saw around 18.0%- 25.0% paper losses by mid Q4 2008, suggesting the current value of SWF assets under management may have declined to $2.5T, from $3.0T.
• Assets under management by SWFs are projected to grow to $8.5 trillion by 2012 if central banks transfer a significant share of their existing funds to SWFs (plus new flows) and $5 trillion if SWFs receive only new flows. Both estimates were revised down from that of 2007.
• About three quarters of SWF investments were in developed countries, mainly, the United Kingdom, the United States and Germany, and 73% were in the services sector at end 2007. Developing countries (esp in Asia) received $10.5 billion, or 27% of the total but SWF activity was limited in Africa and Latin America. Business services made up 24% of the total, with much less going to the primary and manufacturing sectors and financial services.

p/s photo: Eri Otoguro

Malaysia's 3 Biggest Under-Leveraged Business Factors

Over the years, Malaysia has managed to carve out a respectable economy among the emerging markets. Nevertheless, Malaysia could be so much more, so very much more than where we are now. Let me just cit the THREE major business factors that have been conveniently swept under the carpet, ignored, not discussed, not leveraged on, not expanded on, etc. These 3 factors are hugely important and would have allowed Malaysia to be a few notches higher the overall scheme of things. Are we too shay, politically scared, or rather lacked the political will to maximise our potential. The three factors cannot be glossed over. They represents who we are, you cannot change that, we can only be a better country and better citizens once we come to an acceptance of who we are, where we are in the world.

The 3 Biggest Under-Leveraged Business Factors For Malaysia:

1) Most-Neutral/Moderate Muslim Country - While that has been brought more to the forefront over the last 5 years, especially in the areas of Islamic finance and Islamic banking, we need not be shy about the fact that Malaysia is regarded as being the most neutral/moderate Muslim country. Being in that category allows us natural benefits, many countries want us to be engaged in talks and as the link to the Muslim world. Being pragmatic, we need to be clearer of where we are and don't be shy about our links.

2) Overseas Chinese - Name me the country which has the most overseas Chinese who have become citizens of that country. (Take Taiwan out of the equation, Taiwan doesn't count). Its Malaysia.

3) Overseas Indians - Name me the country which has the most overseas Indians who have become citizens of that country. Its Malaysia.

China and India have been growing in their economic might for the last 10 years. We only have Khazanah opening its Beijing office, LAST YEAR!!!!??? In Malaysia, we have the BIGGEST population among its citizen that have ancestors who have come from China and India - and we still speak the languages there. The natural connection should have allowed Malaysian companies and businesses to leverage on those two factors to greater business ties. Why didn't that happen? Does it seems to be "unpatriotic" to leverage on our backgrounds to do business with China and India? That shouldn't be the case, but we rarely dare to talk about these issues. We need to be clear about our identity, no fellow Malaysians should question our Malaysian-ness. Once we have got past that, where our citizenry and loyalty lies, only then can we leverage on our common strengths and advantages without fear or favour.

Its still not too late.

------------------------------------------
Swifz has alerted me to a more correct classification of overseas Chinese and overseas Indian. I stand corrected but I think my points are still valid. Thanks for the correction.

Overseas Chinese

Minority populations
Indonesia	7,776,000
Thailand	7,123,000
Malaysia	6,324,000
United States	3,858,000

Majority populations
Singapore	3,496,710

Overseas Indians

Major ethnic group
Nepal	4,000,000
Malaysia	2,100,000
Myanmar	2,000,000
Saudi Arabia	1,500,000

Minor ethnic group
United States	3,000,000
United Kingdom	1,600,000
South Africa	1,160,000

p/s photos: Eri Otoguro

World's Worst Places To Catch A Cab

I came across an article on the World's Worst Places To Catch A Cab. I thought naturally Malaysia would be in the top 3 ... at least. Then I thought further on what would be the worst things about catching a cab.

Being fleeced would be number one. Untidy, smelly and and unhygienic cabs would be next. Rude, verbally abusive or impolite cab drivers would also count. Safety or a lack of and dangerous driving should also figure. I guess comfort would have to be included. Then there is touting and illegal operators, you don't know who to trust when you are in a foreign place. Last would be cost I guess.

So, in my books, the worst place to catch a cab has to be Malaysia, hands down. Not that I want to run down my own country but its pathetic. The only good thing is cost, and that is so at the bottom of many people's essential list. Its very poorly regulated. There are too many operators, see what happens when you keep giving out master licenses to various operators. Not using the meters. They are taxi drivers but they can pick and choose their passengers, how in hell can I be flagging down cabs and three empty ones pass by not stopping, they must be making a very good living... when you hail a cab, be prepared for a 75% hit-miss ratio, you may not be presentable enough to catch one.

I love the tuk-tuks in Thailand, its a bit dangerous, and yes they may try to fleece you but if you negotiate beforehand, its usually agreeable ... not like here, if you are a foreigner and tries to negotiate a cab fare, you have a better chance of asking Bung Mokhtar to be polite and respectful.

Cairo was scary shit, they are the worst, well not worst in that sense, shall I say most daredevillish drivers in the world. New York was ok and the cab drivers are not as rude or obnoxious or witty as the TV shows make them out to be. London was very good. In HK you can tell when the economy is bad or good, if taxi drivers are more polite and nice, that means the economy is very bad... and vice versa. I get away with murder in Indonesia when I take cabs cause when you speak Indonesian/Malay, hey, its like a family reunion with them.

Sydney's decent as well though in recent years there have been too many new immigrants taking on the cabbie jobs. That's ok too as long as they improve their English skills la. I guess I can comment on cab drivers because I was one before for 2 years while studying in Sydney.
--------------------
Here is the article in Sydney Morning Herald:

Generally I've found the less developed a country, the more perilous you can expect your cab ride to be.

Cab rides in LA, for example, tend to be largely uneventful, and spectacularly expensive. Black cabs in London are the height of predictability - you'll get where you want to go, and it will cost you the equivalent of a month's rent in a Putney flat. (Minicabs are another story, on both counts.)

However, a cab ride in, say, Nairobi is a bit different. For starters, you don't get the taxi to yourself. You'll probably be in a shared taxi, or matatu, which sticks to a rough route, but will pull over anywhere for passengers to get on or off.

So it works out cheaper than a normal taxi, you just have to be prepared to share a mini-van with 15 of your closest African friends.

Plus there's the slight danger of, um, decapitation. I remember picking up the local paper a few days in to my last Kenya trip, and reading about a matatu that had been pulled over and its occupants all slaughtered for the few bucks they were carrying on them. Adds a touch of adrenalin to your ride, I guess.

They won't decapitate you, but cyclo and rickshaw drivers in India's "golden triangle" (Delhi, Agra and Jaipur) will certainly bug you to death. They're the kings of the commission-based up-sell.

First, they'll want to be hired for a full day - which, if you're a talented haggler, could work out to be a good deal. Next, they'll want to suggest the hotel you should really be staying at. And did you know there are some very, very good shops that you should have a look in?

It drives you bananas, but you get where you want to go eventually.

Of course, the "I can't take you to that hotel" routine isn't limited to India. Stop me if I've already told this one, but I had a mate who caught a tuk-tuk somewhere in Thailand, and upon giving the driver the name of the hotel he wanted to go to, was given the old, "Oh, that one burnt down" excuse. As savvy travellers do, he insisted on being taken there anyway, only to find... the burnt-out shell of what was once a hotel. Sigh.

Outside of the danger of being ripped off, there's also the danger of being killed in a high-speed accident. Taxis in Europe are mostly fine, but if you catch one late at night in Prague, take a tip, and whack on a seatbelt. Those guys scream through the wet, cobbled streets like they're late for a tracksuit-and-mullet convention.

Russian cabs are in no danger of breaking land-speed records, but they're not exactly gold-panelled horse-drawn chariots either. My favourite was the St Petersburg taxi whose boot could only be opened with a screwdriver. The driver pulled up, jumped out of the old bomb, jammed a screwdriver in the boot, shoved it with his hip, grunted towards the now open hatch, and leapt back in the cab.

So where's a good place to get a taxi? Try Buenos Aires. As long as you can pronounce your destination in Spanish, you'll be taken straight there, and it'll cost next to nothing.

In the Algarve region of Portugal it'll cost a bit more, but all the taxis are spankin' new Mercedes, so you can put up with forking out a bit more.

I even found Beijing cabs okay, as long as you have the address written down in Mandarin. Mind you, I was blessed to have Beijing's self-proclaimed "number one tassi driver" ferrying me around. Surely not everyone could be that lucky...

p/s photos: I usually do not post photos that are too racy, but I have to make an exception because she has to be the most enticing looking girl I have come across for a long time. Eri Otoguro is a Japanese actress who was born in Bangkok, Thailand. She has a small role in the Hollywood remake of the Thai film, Shutter.