Monday, September 22, 2008

Are Aussie Financial Regulators on the Ball?


Clearly the Government needs to stop dithering and politicking in the face of this full-blown financial crisis and breakdown of regulatory framework. It needs to get bipartisan support and quickly set up an inquiry staffed with the best minds available and briefed on how to best handle the avalanche of collapses that is upon us. New laws, new regulators, new people and a new approach are required to meet the greatest challenge to the financial system since 1929.” Looks like Michael West thinks that more can be done.

In today’s SMH opinion he then goes on to state “ASIC and the ASX let these paper-shufflers and their fast imitators, Allco, MFS and Centro, get away with whatever they wanted in pursuit of their fast buck. They granted myriad waivers from normal disclosure and, even as financial stocks began to get the death wobbles, have refused to force them to produce management agreements over their satellite stocks.

In a study released in April last year, RiskMetrics found externally managed entities (satellite stocks such as Macquarie Airports, Macquarie Infrastructure Group and Babcock & Brown Infrastructure) accounted for 14.3% of waivers granted in the study period (July 2005 to December 2006).”

Regulation of critical lines of supply is a legitimate government function; it is recognised that in some cases individual corporations may be restricted in their practices; with a view that the greater community can have faith and confidence in the fundamental strength of our major institutions, in this case our money supply.

While clearly the US is facing a much bigger crisis than we are here in Australia, if we fail to take the lessons learned from the US experience and sure up our own regulatory processes we are clearly negligent.



REFERENCES:

Monday, September 15, 2008

Santos Clean Up Bill Could Be A$830 Million


The United Nations Environment Program and AusAid have released a study that estimates the cost of the East Java clean-up cost to Santos could be as much as 10 times higher than has been reported to the Stock Exchange.

The front page of the Financial Review reports today that the new estimated clean-up cost is now in the order of A$830 Million.

Santos has not admited liability for the drilling accident but they did report to the stock exchange that they had made a provision of A$88Million for the clean-up.
The drilling accident that occured in 2006; it resulted in a “mud volcano” that has now affected 1800 hectares of East Java.

Over 75,000 people were affected by the accident and none have yet been paid compensation.

The new clean up estimate is based on a solution that would transport the mud 14 Km to the ocean and create a new wetland.
REFERENCES:

Thursday, September 4, 2008

Complexity – Driving Up Costs & Hindering Growth



Executives recognise that complexity is hurting their businesses growth prospects and is driving up costs was the findings of an extensive Bain & Co study. Complexity is considered a critical issue for over 70% of the executives surveyed.

The biggest part of the challenge for service companies is identifying the real cost of complexity and then eliminating it for reduced costs and more strategy implementation flexibility.

For manufacturing complexity sits around in store rooms as unsold product and piles of re-worked scrap; for service industry enterprises, like banks; telecommunications and information technology providers, the problem is less obvious but just as big a driver for increasing costs.

The good news is that eliminating complexity can simultaneously lead to process change that allows your most profitable customers to receive superior service says Mark Gottredson and Andrew Schwedel of Bain & Co.

They recommend a process that identifies your most profitable customers followed by a process review to eliminate complexity so that you can focus on them delivering the superior service.

The steps in the process are:

  1. Calculate what complexity is costing you, and this can be huge. In one insurance company a case manager could realistically only process 4 policy applications per day, half the process performance of its competitors for the most profitable customers. Within a year turn around times had been cut in half and the improved performance lead to significant premium growth.

  2. Find out what your customers truly value. Product complexity can be an indicator that you do not know what your best customers truly value; Bain & Co suggest a process for listening to them. A supermarket chain found that their customers got annoyed that the shelves were often empty of the core products they went shopping for; so instead of increasing product range they reduced product range and increased shelf space for the items they did stock. Given 5% of the products in a supermarket can represent up to 95% of the sales this has proven to be sales growth driver.

  3. Remain Vigilant. All enterprises operate in a changing environment, customers and competitors do not remain static so a process of continuous review and adjustment delivers results.



REFERENCES:

http://www.bain.com/bainweb/home.asp

Monday, September 1, 2008

Qantas “failing to meet its own standards”??


The Australian newspaper reported today that “The Civil Aviation Safety Authority has ordered Qantas to improve its aircraft maintenance systems to head off "emerging problems" after a special review found the airline was failing to meet its own standards.”


At first this seems to intimate that Qantas aircraft maintenance is failing but in the same report it notes CASA did not find an increase in the rate of incidents over more than year and said the number of monthly air safety incident reports was about the same.


There was no statement that indicates Qantas failing to meet its own standards was failing to meet any regulated standards.


If Qantas standards were above industry average it is worth considering if this move by CASA is a discouragement for airlines to set themselves high standards?


Up-date on the Qantas exploding oxygen bottle incident is that "There's nothing at this stage that the ATSB can identify that could have been done to prevent this, (the exploding oxygen bottle) we don't really know why the bottle failed - that's the key question for the investigation."


Even more good news for Qantas is that Mr. Walsh of the ATSB said "As far as we can tell from all the information that's available to us the crew have pretty much done a textbook response," it must be good news that Qantas has demonstrated a good standard, a ‘textbook response’ when an incident that apparently could not be avoided occurred - well done!


It may be a bit rough on the Qantas brand to have the findings of the “special review’ reported a headline grabbing perception that has not been backed up with any identified hard data. Nothing has been presented that indicates that standards have dropped at Qantas.