Bursa Malaysia to take on ASEAN

Yesterday, news portal reported that Bursa Malaysia (BM) together with Singapore Stock Exchange (SGX) and Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET) are set to join the Asean Exchange Linkage which will go live by the 2nd half of 2011.


In addition to the linkage, the exchanges would also promote leading Asean public companies under the brand of "Asean Star". The cross-border offering of collective investment scheme would kicks-in after that.

Migration of local investors?
In fact, many local investors are already trading overseas shares, especially Singapore and Hong Kong markets. For them, this made no significant difference, except that the new cross-border trading will reduce the lagging time, thus, boosting the participation and matching rate. If the overhead costs of trading is reduced accordingly, investors will be more reluctant to trade. Anyway, investors can diversify more effectively to regional markets soon.

Brokers do not "broke" anymore?
Local brokers are expecting a revival of the industry, last seen in the 90s. Reportedly, all local stock broking firms would be given the green light to link with the new platform. But, brokers would need to monitor regional markets too, with more than few thousands counters!!!


What is the impact to Bursa Malaysia?
Of course, Bursa Malaysia could benefit from the cross-border trading with increase revenue generated, up-lifting the profile of local market, making it more attractive and vibrant. However, I scared local investors would in turn, shunning the local market in favor of regional markets.

Weathering the storm together...
After all, we will stick together more closely, and shoulder the good and bad times together. This is because, investors are becoming more regional, and a fall in one market would most likely going to trigger a fall in another market.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"You Can Keep Your Existing Health Insurance"

I wondered about this statement at the time Obama made it.  Clearly, by changing all the rules of health care insurance and mandating conformity, it was unlikely that the vast majority of Americans would not find themselves forced by 'The Affordable Care Act' to have to deal with a completely different health insurance plan and completely different set of health care providers. I now understand what Obama meant.   He was speaking to his immediate family and (politician) friends.  They are exempt from the "Affordable Care Act."  Clearly what he meant to say was: "if you are exempt from Obamacare, like me and my family, you can keep your existing health insurance."  He never meant to mislead.
Read more

Work Ethic of 70s, 80s, 90s

Image
Different generations have their own view on working. You like it or not, working is part of our live. No work = No life. However, this equation has since changed to " Working = No life ". Do you agree? Generally, those born in 70s were perceived to be loving their job. They work hard mainly because of 3 meals/day. For them, a secured life means having a stable job with stable income. They believe that with every efforts you put in, that will reward you back later. As such, over time (OT) is nothing for them. As a responsible 70s, losing their job is a serious matter they tend to avoid. That's why they usually found another job first, before resigning. How about 80s? Other than chasing for stable income, those 80s working adults will also look into the job scope , opportunity for promotion , or working environment . They will take initiative to find for better job. Hence, job hopping is very common for them. Notably, 80s are reluctant to sacrifice their quality of life b
Read more

Things We Now Know

The poor are losing ground in the new Obama world.  The facts are showing up even in the halls of collectivist extremes like the New York Times.  The rich are getting richer and poor are being locked in place.  Big government is throttling the economy and the hopes and dreams of lower and middle class Americans. Today's Wall Street Journal's article by Simon Constable lays out some of the simple and obvious facts of the Obama era: "The richest 20% of households account for 38% of spending, according to government data for 2011, the latest available.  Compare that with 2003 when the top earners spent 26% of the total."  The article goes on to say..."it could get even worse."  It will. Who really benefits when the regulators strangle the banks?  Do banks really need to get much more conservative in their lending practices?  Why does the government know best?  How far can you stretch the FDIC guarantees before American banking is simply a subsidiary of the US g
Read more