Share This

Monday, 14 June 2010

Namewee parodies World Cup fever in Malaysia

PETALING JAYA: Controversial rapper Wee Meng Chee, better known as Namewee, has composed a new music video to parody the World Cup football fever.

The clip was uploaded on both popular video sharing site YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/user/namewee and his personal blog several days ago.

Loading...
Official Fifa World Cup 2010 SongIn the song, Wee narrated how the country had never been shortlisted for the World Cup and how Malaysians had to resort to merely betting on the games and watching football matches in order to get a feel of participating in the tournament.

He also rapped about illegal bookies and wives and girlfriends of football fans complaining about being neglected due to the football matches.

The over four-minute long video also features a number of women clad in attractive sport outfits playing football.

In his blog, Wee said he had written the song to bring a different feel to Malaysia’s participation in the World Cup and urged everyone to work harder for sports.

In the video clip, he had also taken a dig at Malaysia’s performance in the last Thomas Cup badminton tournament and on “Datuk Lee’s” comments and reasoning behind it.

The Malaysian badminton team had lost to both Japan and Indonesia during the Thomas Cup.
The video, which recorded over 151,000 views so far, has attracted diverse comments from viewers, including praises and criticisms.

The 27-year-old Muar-born artiste first made headlines with his infamous Negarakuku YouTube music video in 2007, which he did while studying in a university in Taiwan.

The song had used the national anthem as the background to his rap.
He was subsequently questioned by the Bukit Aman Commercial Crimes headquarters for his song and asked to provide a translation of it in Bahasa Malaysia.

Since then, the rapper had also been criticised for hitting out at Tenaga Nasional Bhd after his home in Muar was hit by a blackout and for his views and sentiments on the Chinese independent school system.

He was reported to be planning and seeking government funding for a film.

Source: The Star, Monday June 14, 2010





Sunday, 13 June 2010

Fifa World Cup runneth over

SHUT UP ABOUT ADVERTISING
By PAUL LOOSLEY

HERE we go! Here we go! Here we go! World Cup fever is upon us again. And, as usual, quite suddenly, and often not too wisely, vast amounts of cash are flying around. And the competition amongst the advertisers becoming at least as hotly contested as the games themselves.

To kick-off, in Ad Age we hear that Trevor Edwards, Nike’s VP-brand and category management, feels “It’s the No. 1 event in all of sports, viewed by half the world’s population.”

If he’s right, that would explain another report in Media magazine that CCTV supposedly paid in excess of the US$292.7mil for coverage of the 2002 tournament.

If they and others are still spending that kind of money, and there’s every indication they are, then that’s a lot of moolah for a recession-struck world.

And there are, as usual, a lot of “official” advertising sponsors who are obviously handing over huge sums to FIFA and spending equally large bundles on advertisements.

Regular sponsor Coca-Cola are out there with a quite cute, 60-minute spot that features the story of Roger Miller, the first player, appropriately an African, to do a goal-scoring victory dance. So they trace the evolution of the football victory dance ever since. Lots of money on stock footage, all probably handed over to Russian club owners.

Campaign magazine picks the Adidas’ Star Wars Cantina spot as a standout. In the commercial they have assembled a team of celebrities such as David Beckham, Franz Beckenbauer, Snoop Dogg, Noel Gallagher, Ian Brown, Ciara, Jay Baruchel, Daft Punk and DJ Neil Armstrong.

These folks have been magically incorporated into the cantina scene from the original 1977 ‘Star Wars’ movie (nerd alert; Episode IV: A New Hope).

It must have cost a mint for both the celebrity’s fees and for George Lucas film rights (all of whom really need the money).

And it may be a little bit of a stretch to use the theme line Celebrate Originality, with a bit of old film and stars that are not all fully match-fit.

AdWeek likes the Nike Write the Future spot (and so do I). It shows many prominent soccer stars at pivotal, win or lose moments in a football game.

In a flash forward they imagine how their lives might turn out should they not perform too well. The sight of Wayne Rooney as bearded and down and out and living in a caravan is wonderful. And the cameo by Homer Simpson is a blast.

The director is Alejandro G. Iñárritu, who made the movies Babel and 21 Grams.

The spot debuted on TV but has become a big viral hit; being talked about, passed around and celebrated on Facebook and YouTube.

Again, it probably cost the national debt of Greece, but it certainly proves the actual worth of a well-written, brilliantly executed TVC.

Yet not everyone plays by the ‘official’ rules it seems.
FIFA are getting a bit edgy as some people are realising that paying for the right to call yourself “official sponsor” isn’t worth as much as FIFA and Trevor Edwards maybe think it is.

In fact FIFA are trying to stop people using other anthemic songs about football as opposed to paying FIFA, I guess, to use the “official” World Cup songs; Waka Waka. This Time for Africa (written by Fozzi Bear one assumes and performed, oddly, by that not-at-all African hip-swinger Shakira) and Waving Flag (an infinitely better song with real African feel and sing-a-long zeal).

Campaign magazine again reports another sponsorship foul. It seems that Mars (the very sweet, caramelly chocolate bars) paid a heap of dosh for official sponsorship of the English footy team.

Then they made a fairly dull spot that shows old sportsmen and women reliving past glories.

But then Kit Kat, (the greenly-challenged chocolate biscuity fingers) which didn’t fork out great heaps of cash for sponsorship, is being advertised using a football theme too, and with a far more imaginative spot to boot.

So Mars are talking about suing Nestle. I’m told this is called “ambush marketing”. But hey, anyone who can afford it (and it seems they can) is advertising using football as a theme.

Pepsi have a neat ad where a bunch of soccer stars, en route to a game in South Africa, are waylaid by a bunch of kids who challenge them to a soccer match for their cans of Pepsi.

Problem is the crowd, who form the goal mouth and the boundary, keep moving. So the stars lose. People have been saying it portrays Africans as cheats.

The Cup may be big, but minds remain small. Carlsberg beer has an ad featuring creaky old timers like Bobby Charlton, Alan Shearer and the ilk playing an afternoon pub game.

Old pros again, but this time done with immense charm. Optus, the Australian telco have an excellent spot where a team is training and playing against African animals like rhinos and elephants. Jolly exciting, beautifully made and quite relevant.

And, as a penalty shootout, Malaysia has old makciks dancing about, more old football players and football players turning into what appear to be African animals. A yellow card I suspect.

There it is, the final whistle. Another great result for the World Cup and its sponsors. It provokes many excellent creative ideas, which is very good indeed. But within days it’s all over and will be quickly forgotten.

Advertisers who have plead poverty for three years have turned up with surprise money, as if suddenly and miraculously discovered down the back of the sofa, and they’ve blown the lot.

The lack of moderation and the feeding frenzy that accompanied the event does tend to end with one asking whether it was all really worth it.

In the rush to participate did they all take their eye off the ball (boom tish!)

For me it’s all a bit too much, so I think I’ll lock myself in the dressing room for the duration. And ask myself:
“Is the cash more beautiful than the game?”

Wake me when it’s over.

Paul Loosley is an English person who has been in Asia 32 years, 12 as a creative director, 20 making TV commercials. And, as he still can’t shut up about advertising, he tends to write every month. Any feedback, email
p.loosley@gmail.com (but only if you swear never use the word ‘soccer’).

Up Close and Personal with Datuk Seri Edmund Santhara




By TEE LIN SAY
linsay@thestar.com.my

FOR Masterskill Education Group Bhd’s founder Datuk Seri Edmund Santhara, who spent most of his early years growing up in the estates, it was a big deal when he secured a seat in a local university many years ago. But this he could not have envisaged until it finally happened – owning one.

Masterskill, the country’s largest operator of non-government nursing colleges, made its debut on Bursa Malaysia last month, making its mark as the country’s largest initial public offering so far this year. The growth path of this health science college over the past three years has been phenomenal; revenue has more than doubled from RM126.5mil in FY2007 to RM273.4mil in FY09. FY08 in particular, was a pretty outstanding year for Masterskill as revenue surged 60% from the year before.

That year, student enrolment jumped 55%.
Today Masterskill generates net profits of RM97.38mil.

Where it all began

“Masterskill started from an idea. We saw a need in the market. I wanted to bridge an opportunity gap, as Malaysia is a net importer of nurses. We have a serious shortfall of nurses and health workers, so surely something is wrong. There is ample room for growth in Malaysia’s healthcare industry,” he says.

From a more altruistic perspective, Edmund says his primary focus is to provide an opportunity to Malaysians who want to succeed by caring for somebody else.

“Before Masterskill, the Health Ministry (MOH) struggled to get bumiputras to study in the science stream. In Masterskill, 80% of the bumiputras are in the science stream!” he says. Today, 52% of Masterskill’s students are bumiputras from Peninsular Malaysia, 21% are Christian bumiputras and the remainder are Chinese and Indians.

“When I first started out conceptualising this idea, we were doing a paradigm shift. We were going against the hospitals. Firstly, we don’t own hospitals. We decided not to compete with the other players. We trained students with a skill that the market really needed,” says Edmund.

Backed only with their dreams, Edmund and his partners approached the MOH with their idea of setting up a health science college.

“We wanted to use some of the public hospitals as our training ground. The benefits for doing this were obvious. By doing this, students would get better clinical exposure, and the hospital’s staff ratio would also increase. We suggested using some of the public hospitals as training ground for the students,” he says.

MOH saw merits in the idea, and allowed them to proceed. Then came the second part of the headache. Masterskill’s college was in Cheras, but the hospitals for training were in Sabah and Sarawak.

“We decided to take in students from Sabah and Sarawak. During their holiday break, they would be able to return to their hometowns and concurrently do their practical training. This immediately lowered our transportation cost which resulted in a savings of up to 50%,” he says.

Idea turns reality

Edmund says most of his inspiration and drive come from his humble background in the estates.
His parents were rubber tappers and school was 28 miles away. Going to school was a constant challenge, but through the combination of hitch-hiking from lorries, a walk and further hitch-hiking from other vehicles along the same route, he managed to get to school.



“I used to get caned for going to school late. It was pure hardship, living from day to day. Education was my only way out (of the estates),” he recalls.

“Education was the platform to reveal my ability. It was the key that could open my first door. Desperation leads you to success,” he says.

It’s been a huge leap for this salt-of-the-earth entrepreneur since. One can imagine how overwhelming it must have been when he got his cheque for RM1mil in 2007 from his partner.

Following the IPO exercise, Edmund has a 22.1% stake in the company worth RM335mil based on current market value.

Wealth of change?

Has all this wealth changed Edmund? “Money is a bi-product of success. It facilitates, but it is not the carrot,” emphasises Edmund. He believes success comes through getting things done.

“The power is in execution and speed. The outcome will be decided by the industry and God,” he says.

And certainly, Edmund practises what he preaches, not just in his professional life, but also in personal discipline.

He recently lost 10kg in a month and plans to lose a further 4kg.

He is a big believer of self actualisation – a concept where one is able to have an achievement and stand among his fellow man.

Therefore, it isn’t surprising that he is most let down when he fails to meet his expectations.

On that note, he also believes in engagement with the community. He does his bit by giving motivation talks to the underprivileged.

“If I speak to 100 people, and I inspire one person, then I have achieved my goal,” he says.

Now everyone can learn

Not surprisingly, Edmund does not go in search of rich students for his courses in Masterskill.

He goes to rural areas such as Limbang, Kuala Penyu, Sabah and Sarawak to attract students.

“What Masterskill offers students is an opportunity to study and graduate from an institution that is recognised and one that gives you a career beyond Malaysia.”

“It is a rewarding career and one that is noble and makes you feel happy. It’s about saving lives,” he says.
He says many households in Sabah and Sarawak only have a monthly income of RM600 to RM700.

“Once a student studies and graduates from Masterskill, he earns a living and his income increases the household income by four to six times? This definitely has a social and economic impact on every family,” he says.

Edmund’s indulgences are his children and chess. Today, Edmund has an eclectic collection of close to 500 chess sets from across the globe.

His passion for the game has seen him start the Kuala Lumpur Chess Association, of which he is founder and director. He is also the director of the Asian Chess Federation.

Edmund was a gold medalist in the inter-varsity competition in 1998 when he represented University Kebangsaan Malaysia.

Edmund’s grandmother, with whom he was very close, had passed away last year. She had been extremely proud when he got into a local university.

Does he have any major regrets? “Today I own a university. I wish I could tell her (grandmother) that,” he says.

Quit resisting change, letting go can help you get ahead

 Stop being a monkey, let go!

SCIENCE OF BUILDING LEADERS
By ROSHAN THIRAN

ONCE a monkey has gotten hold of food in its hand, it is close to impossible to get the primate to let it go. And this makes trapping it easy for monkey catchers.

In Malaysia, a villager developed the ingenious “Monkey Trap” by burying a coconut and drilling a narrow hole big enough for a monkey’s hand to go through. He would place pieces of fruit, nuts or meat on skewers in the coconut. The odour and smell of the treats attracts monkeys to reach into the narrow opening and grab hold of the treats. As the monkey attempts to extract the treats, it finds that its fistful of food will not fit through the narrow opening.

The monkey will scream in frustration as he continues to hold on to his food and attempts to remove his hand from the coconut. The villager comes over and drops a net over the monkey. Even though the monkey sees the villager approaching, so intent is it on keeping the food that it grips the morsels even tighter and tries even harder to dislodge its fist.

Nothing is keeping that monkey captive except the force of its own attachment. All it has to do to escape is let go of the food. But so strong is the force of greed that it is a rare monkey which can let go.

Aren’t many business leaders just like monkeys? We may laugh at the monkey for its stupidity but every day we see similar foolishness displayed by many business leaders who struggle with letting go. Like monkeys, many leaders fail when they hold on too tightly to something that leads them astray.

We simply can’t let go of products, services and practices that worked in the past which contribute little today but require significant amounts of our time and attention. Or we struggle to let go of our ego and pride. And some business leaders simply can’t let go of their business and stay on in their roles way past their expiry date.

But the phenomenon is not limited to business leaders. Many people are traumatically bonded and cling on to bad relationships even though they know better. Or we can’t let go of a bad habit. Worse still, many hold on to old beliefs and dogma like “if it’s not broken, why fix it” and end up missing the boat when changes need to be made. Why is this?

In the case of the monkey, greed is the key reason. Greed and avarice are why executives fail to let go. And greed leads to fear.

Chinese philosopher Zhuangzi wrote: “He who considers wealth a good thing can never bear to give up his income; he who considers eminence a good thing can never bear to give up his fame. He who has a taste for power can never bear to hand over authority to others. Holding tight to these things, such men shiver with fear; should they let them go, they would pine in sorrow.”

While greed for food holds the monkey back, what holds us back? Is it our ego, power, pride or greed?

Successful business leaders struggle with letting go of their products and services that worked previously because they fear the unknown. The fear of losing the past outweighs the gain of the future. Thich Nhat Hanh, a famous Buddhist teacher, said: “People have a hard time letting go of their suffering. Out of a fear of the unknown, they prefer suffering that is familiar.”

They believe if they keep going the same way, even though it may be painful now, somehow life will return to the excesses of before in the future. Albert Einstein rebuts this belief: “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

Status Quo 

Each of us naturally wants to maintain status quo, sticking to the safe and comfortable. According to Edward Miller, dean of John Hopkins medical school, people won’t change even if their lives depended on it. He studied people two years after their coronary artery bypass grafting and found 90% of them had not changed their lifestyle even though they knew they could die. They just could not change their lifestyle for whatever reason.

CEOs are supposedly the prime change agents for their companies but they are often most resistant to change.

When Louis Gerstner took over as CEO of IBM, he started by sticking to the McKinsey routine that had worked for him throughout his career – analysis paralysis and strategy. He thought he could revive the company through drills such as selling assets and cost cutting which were his comfort zones. But he was wrong and to his credit, he changed his consultant approach to a more cultural transformative one, thereby enabling IBM’s revival.

But most leaders resist change and are crippled by excuses to retain status quo. If you walk into any business and hear the following excuses, you are in a business where there are a lot of monkeys who just can’t let go:

· We’ve never done it before and it’s not possible.


· We/another company/person tried it before and it won’t work here. Our company is different.

· We’ve been doing it this way for the past 50 years.

· Why change – it’s working OK. Everything is fine here.

· Management will hate it. This company is not ready for it.

· It needs further investigation and more thought.

· Our competitors are not doing it. Why should we?

· We don’t have the money/resources/assets to do this.

· The union will scream. It’s too much trouble to change.

· Customers won’t buy it. It’s too radical a change

Ego

Ego is responsible for the majority of business failures. Disney, Wang Laboratories and even General Motors’ slide from glory was due to leadership ego. Even celebrity CEOs are not immune to ego issues. Steve Jobs was kicked out of the company he founded because of ego issues.

A personal example while I worked at GE is of the legendary Jack Welch, whose refusal to part with Montgomery Ward, a trouble departmental store that came to GE looking for an infusion of US$100mil to reverse the retailer’s fortunes. It wasn’t enough and the next year it came back and asked for more.

GE, faced with losing its original investment, gave the firm the additional money and then proceeded to give more the next year and the following years. To protect an initial US$100mil investment, GE eventually wasted billions. Just like the monkey who couldn’t let go, the world’s greatest CEO couldn’t let go of a black hole and later admitted it was ego that stood in the way.

Nelson Mandela quit as president of South Africa after his first term a legend. Some leaders can’t let go of their businesses and stay in the job way past their expiry date, causing the business or country to be ruined in the process.

Outdated beliefs

It is hard to identify even one single big business success that was achieved by following conventional wisdom. Yet many still rely on it daily.

A secretary working part-time while studying at a university in the US refused to learn the computer and only used the typewriter. She was typing 300 words a minute and believed if she kept improving her speed, her job was safe. Whilst everything around her told her to embrace the computer, her inner belief said otherwise. A year later, they fired her and replaced her with someone who typed 80 words a minute but could use the computer.

The newspaper industry globally is in decline and many blame the advent of the Internet to this decline. But researchers Michael Moore and Sean Paul Kelley believe that it is greed and the reliance on outdated wisdom that has seen the print media’s decline.

Each of us have beliefs and conventional thinking stifling our progress. Take time and re-examine your beliefs and remove and replace the ones that don’t work. Businesses need to do this often too.

In life, there are many things that we have to learn to let go. We have to let go of situations, things, memories, attachment to people and even ourselves. It can be very painful when it’s time to let go.

Letting go is similar to crossing monkey bars. You have to let go at some point in order to move forward. Letting go can be one of the scariest experiences in your life but only by boldly taking a leap of faith into the unknown can you truly be the leader you were meant to be.

So, this weekend, why not reflect and learn to “let go” of something that is holding you back from greatness. Remember, every exit is an entry to somewhere else.

Think of it this way: you’re on a hiking trip and along the way you keep picking up heavy objects, things that don’t really help you get up the hill. After a while, these objects begin to slow you down and unless you get rid of them, you’ll never complete your trip. So, let them go.

Roshan Thiran is CEO of Leaderonomics, a social enterprise passionate about transforming the nation through leadership development. For more information on leadership programmes for your organisation, call 012-3291968 or login to
www.leaderonomics.com.

Mortgage or loan term insurance

COMMENT
By RAYMOND ROY TIRUCHELVAM

IN times of old, when we buy a property, it was meant for stay, as the term owner-occupied. Slowly, this was extended, when people bought properties for investment purposes. Realising this venture as a business, financial institutions, which usually finance these investments, started assessing the risks associated with it. Hence the birth of the loan or mortgage related insurance coverage.

Today, in Malaysian there are two main types of housing loan related insurance coverage, called MRTA (mortgage reducing term assurance) and MLTA (mortgage level term assurance). The former was the first to be offered, but both protect the loan borrower against death or total permanent disability (TPD). Basically, in the event of loss of life or TPD (or in some instances also covering critical illness, depending on the terms) the policy will cover the remaining payment obligation due under the housing loan to the bank.


The main differentiation factor lies in the offerings and coverage categories, whereby MRTA acts like a life insurance, the premium is lost in the end, but for MLTA it acts as a term policy, whereby there is cash-back in the event of no claim. Furthermore, the MRTA is a reducing balance coverage, that pays back in accordance with a reducing balance schedule, and at the end of the tenor the payable sum is zero. This is not the same for MLTA whereby the coverage is fixed from start, meaning the person gets cash-back mounting to the sum insured.

While it is easy to see, which options stands out the better, we need to further analyse two more factors. Firstly, it involves the fact that the premium for the MLTA is much higher. This can go to 10 times higher in totality compared to a MRTA premium. Which brings us to the second factor, which is the purpose. The purpose of the home mortgage insurance, if we can remember, is to cover us against TPD and death, whereby our family is not burdened with the financing. If we seek to find a reasonable cost approach and in the MRTA instance, to be financed by the bank via lump sum payment capitalised into the loan, then the choice is obvious.

Let us take an example in order to show the details. Thirty-year old Vaniza Carlos is buying a RM125,000 property, and is taking up a 30-year term 80% loan financing package. She is faced with the option of choosing a loan insurance package, and her friendly insurance agent Cryced sets out the terms as per Table 1.
Which will be your pick?

Just for analysis purposes, in order to equate the total cost of the MLTA to current value (to bring it to MRTA equivalent), using the NPV approach at 10% discount rate (method of derivation which was featured in my previous article), the NPV value works out to about RM9,950, which is effectively only about 3 times higher than the cost for MLTA. Year 2020 is 10 years into the loan agreement, where the outstanding loan sum would have reduced to about 75% of original sum.


Nevertheless, under the bancassurance umbrella, there are many types of term life policies which are not directly linked to the property but offers similar risk coverage. Bancassurance is defined as insurance business being provided by banks of financial institutions. This term was coined after banks started merging with insurance companies, and in combination started offering products with dual, loan and risk coverage facilities, among others. But do be careful, as MRTA and MLTA usually covers main critical illnesses (albeit limited from the full list of known 36 critical illnesses), whereas term life policies differs.

It is interesting to note that banks are now insuring this “business venture” or property investment, and if this can be extended to say a business of setting up a restaurant with an initial cost of RM100,000, with the same terms being applied. Food for thought, isn’t it?

Raymond Roy Tiruchelvam … “I forget what I was taught, I only remember what I learnt” is a business planner with SABIC group of companies