Biopolis will be a success or failure?
-
We are not forgetting about the semi con industry... because China has overtaken us.. (p.s. Taiwan overtook us 10 years ago) We are now focusing on BIO Tech. South Korea cloned first dog.... California has 20 years head start since the 80s pharma .... what has SG got to offer?
Koreans can reach such heights because of the freedom & democracy plus
the strong foundation of hierarchical system that enforces great
disciplines
From the start, any government or any govt. board to openly and broadly interfere in R&D, business and other matters. Furthur more, by only jumping into the bandwagon after everyone else is just utterly stupid.
Other people in other countries are always glad when they know that they and their businesses or business ventures are not controlled broadly by the govt- as govt control always slows down business ventures and business itself.
Now as it is, the US businessmen are criticising the Bush adminstration openly in financial magazines(like Forbes and The Economist)for shifting toward protectionism as they feel such action interferes with their business with China. They both have the right and freedom to criticise.
I don't see an iota of benefit Biopolis brings to common Singaporeans. The only thing it brings are high paying jobs for foreign scientists and profit opportunities for corporations.
What do average Singaporeans get? Maybe nice buildings to look at. -
those in the field will know .... you'll be surprised at the amount of exposure singapore is getting from this ..... was talking to this bioinformatics researcher at my uni here in canada, lots of collaboration going on it seems, everyone has heard of the biopolis .... a good thing about singapore is that we're small ... we're able to move fast and cut the red tape given the goverment impetus ... and there seems to be lots of it in this case ... the US is NOT ahead ... and they know it ... cos they are hamstrung by their mountains of red-tape and heavy handed regulatory bodies ..... why do you think dolly the sheep was cloned in ireland instead ? ....Originally posted by Love Story:We are not forgetting about the semi con industry... because China has overtaken us.. (p.s. Taiwan overtook us 10 years ago) We are now focusing on BIO Tech. South Korea cloned first dog.... California has 20 years head start since the 80s pharma .... what has SG got to offer?
Koreans can reach such heights because of the freedom & democracy plus
the strong foundation of hierarchical system that enforces great
disciplines
From the start, any government or any govt. board to openly and broadly interfere in R&D, business and other matters. Furthur more, by only jumping into the bandwagon after everyone else is just utterly stupid.
Other people in other countries are always glad when they know that they and their businesses or business ventures are not controlled broadly by the govt- as govt control always slows down business ventures and business itself.
Now as it is, the US businessmen are criticising the Bush adminstration openly in financial magazines(like Forbes and The Economist)for shifting toward protectionism as they feel such action interferes with their business with China. They both have the right and freedom to criticise.
I don't see an iota of benefit Biopolis brings to common Singaporeans. The only thing it brings are high paying jobs for foreign scientists and profit opportunities for corporations.
What do average Singaporeans get? Maybe nice buildings to look at. -
Time will tell...
-
It will fail. The moment the govt gets its dirty hands on R&D- which it shouldn't have done- and with the civil servants and A*Star "scholars" in place, there will not be enough freedom for these scientists to do their research.
Unlike in South Korea, where the govt only gives them verbal encouragement, and research facilities, they don't take a heavy handed approach and interfere in everything. The scientists who made the stem cell breakthrough in early July and also cloned the dog, did it by themselves- without the state inferering in their business.
And one point to moot..most of the SK researchers are local talents. The majority of the scientists here who came are all foreigners, as in FTs- part of govt. policy to try and naturalise some of these people to become S'poreans. -
Why do I get the feeling that I have seen this article before? Or that I typed that in another messageboards recently?Originally posted by Love Story:We are not forgetting about the semi con industry... because China has overtaken us.. (p.s. Taiwan overtook us 10 years ago) We are now focusing on BIO Tech. South Korea cloned first dog.... California has 20 years head start since the 80s pharma .... what has SG got to offer?
Koreans can reach such heights because of the freedom & democracy plus
the strong foundation of hierarchical system that enforces great
disciplines
From the start, any government or any govt. board to openly and broadly interfere in R&D, business and other matters. Furthur more, by only jumping into the bandwagon after everyone else is just utterly stupid.
Other people in other countries are always glad when they know that they and their businesses or business ventures are not controlled broadly by the govt- as govt control always slows down business ventures and business itself.
Now as it is, the US businessmen are criticising the Bush adminstration openly in financial magazines(like Forbes and The Economist)for shifting toward protectionism as they feel such action interferes with their business with China. They both have the right and freedom to criticise.
I don't see an iota of benefit Biopolis brings to common Singaporeans. The only thing it brings are high paying jobs for foreign scientists and profit opportunities for corporations.
What do average Singaporeans get? Maybe nice buildings to look at. -
By: Mellanie Hewlitt
Source: Singapore Review
Date: 8 Jan 2003
(First Published on Singapore Review)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sg_Review/message/76
In the 4 Jan 2003 issue of the Straits Times (PhD pool to be expanded with new
scholarships), Mr Philip Yeo adopted the analogy of PHDs as an investment. Let
me play devil's advocate and apply simple Cost/Benefits analysis to his
analogy.
"A full scholarship from undergraduate to PhD level, including salary, fees and allowance, works out to a hefty $900,000 or so per student."
When can we expect to recover initial CAPEX and outlay of $900k? Definitely not
during the minimum 4-6 years when the scholar is completing his PHD. This is
a "Holding Period" for the investment horizon.
Now let's see the Benefits side of the equation. Going along the lines of Mr
Yeo's analogy, let us treat human capital like a stock or a bond and apply
basic Valuation Theory where:
“Total Expected ReturnPHD” = “Current YieldPHD” + “Capital Gains YieldPHD”
What is the Current Yield on the PHD "Talent"? PHD scholars are not productive
assets and do not earn any cash returns whilst in school. Also, unlike a share
(or bond) there is no dividend (or coupon) return during this 4 year Holding
Period. So Current Yield of PHD is virtually zero.
As for the Capital Gains Yield, that may or may not take place and is a
function of the scholar's estimated salary (the price of the investment) if and
when he does find gainful employment 4 years later. Unlike a share or bond, you
also cannot "liquidate" a scholar. So what is the potential return on a
PHD "Talent" in 4 years time? This potential return is even harder to estimate
when you consider that there is a Risk Premium to be weighted.
RISKS:
What is the Market Risk Premium here? There are several risks, the first and
most obvious being that after the 4 year Holding Period, conditions in the
labour market have changed so drastically that there is no avenue for
employment of these highly trained professional scholars. In that worst-case
scenario, the human capital will not reap any return at all.
Additionally, there is also the Asset Default Risk taken on the actual stock
(or in this case the scholar himself). What happens if he fails the course and
has to repeat an entire semester? This would delay his final entry into the
labour market and increase the Hold Period which also increases the window of
risk exposure. Or, what happens if we have a bond breaker? That would mean the
entire investment has to be written off.
Finally, the Holding Period itself is a window of risk that may not necessarily
be limited to only 4 years. Many of these graduates have already been in
university for 3-4 years for their undergraduate degree before embarking a
further 4 years on the PHD program. So this brings the sum total of the
gestation period or 'holding period to 7-8 years. Factor in another 2-3 years
in full time National Service, this would mean that the scholar will be close
to 30 years old before he is finally ready to start work. Of cause, one way to
reduce this risk is to have the scholar pursue his PHD course whilst gainfully
employed.
So, is a PHD Talent worth $900k? The above valuation theory is unable to
confirm this conclusion.
What then is the object of this entire PHD exercise? Quoting A*Star chairman
Philip Yeo, "Eventually, they (the PHD scholars) will become a key attraction
to multinational companies to move their high-end research projects to
Singapore".
This is a rather ambiguous, distant and vague outcome to wager an investment
on. The availability of research expertise is only one of a myriad of factors
that will influence a foreign MNC's decision in setting up shop here. Each MNC
will have its own individual needs and requirements. These include
political/economic environment, logistical factors, tax-incentives,
operating/production cost base, industrial factors, infrastructure and support
Â… the list goes on.
And let us also not forget that talent and expertise can be bought and
imported. But I will not digress into a discussion on Foreign Talent today.
Given those numbers and odds, it is understandable why there is some doubt
regarding Mr Yeo's latest investment product and his overwhelming fascination
with the accumulation of paper qualifications, which also begets the question:
have we lost the better part of ourselves in this on-going paper chase?
Perhaps itÂ’s time to step back and look at things in perspective. -
From: [email protected]
Date: Wed Sep 24, 2003 3:20 am
Subject: Investing in PhD students: Are we getting our money's worth? [email protected]
Send Email
Editor's Word;
Earlier this year, a New Paper journalist had approached me regarding a
Singapore Review article which debated the merits of investing in PHDs.
I initially gave permission to New Paper to re-print the article. However, on
hearing that my article would be heavily edited and subject to comment by
various members of the NUS academic profession, I had withdrawn my consent. It
sounded like a clandestine set-up to me and I wanted nothing to do with it.
Having heard nothing further from the New paper, I assumed the New paper and
SPH had abandoned the story (as I had also requested for them to inform me
should they publish the story).
This incident was long forgotten until a colleague e-mailed me the New paper
article. In true underhanded Singapore Press fashion, the New Paper had
published a one sided version of the story. Whilst brief mention was made to my
article, this was purely done as an opening to provide avenues for the four NUS
academics/professors to launch their premise. My initial fears were well
founded and it was a set-up in typical SPH fashion with New paper holding all
the cards. I was out matched and out numbered 4-1.
What is noteworthy is the fact that the New Paper had approached (of all
professions) various academics (four professors from the NUS) for
their "unbiased" and "objective" views. This is akin to approaching a cigarette
manufacturer for a confirmation on the health benefits of Nicotine consumption.
Additionally, the New Paper had focused on only 1 solitary company which was
set-up by the same four NUS Professors.
To be honest, this is not the first time I have had to put up with "selective
myopia" from Singapore's local press. In this instance, the surreptitious
nature of the New paper article left my blood boiling.
For the sake of clarity, I have appended both articles (unedited) below for
benefit of readers so they can see both sides of the story.
Singapore Review Article:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sg_Review/message/76
New Paper Article:
http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/top/story/0,4136,18449-1046966340,00.html -
i feel that with the over emphasis on churning out commercially viable products and drugs, in the end, the biopolis will end up becoming a factory treating people like robots and forcing them to continually develop new things, in the idea of "keeping up with the times".
the idea of true research and scientific collaboration in order to really produce products that really benefit the world will be tossed aside.
also, i feel that those that fail to deliver can be thrown out fairly easily. there is no way they are allowed to work without deadlines looming around them.
maybe it might be a success, but right now, i do not think the results will be significant in one or two decades. -
if i'm not wrong, china recently had their first cloned pig or cat, and sheep...Originally posted by Love Story:We are not forgetting about the semi con industry... because China has overtaken us.. (p.s. Taiwan overtook us 10 years ago) We are now focusing on BIO Tech. South Korea cloned first dog.... California has 20 years head start since the 80s pharma .... what has SG got to offer?
Koreans can reach such heights because of the freedom & democracy plus
the strong foundation of hierarchical system that enforces great
disciplines
From the start, any government or any govt. board to openly and broadly interfere in R&D, business and other matters. Furthur more, by only jumping into the bandwagon after everyone else is just utterly stupid.
Other people in other countries are always glad when they know that they and their businesses or business ventures are not controlled broadly by the govt- as govt control always slows down business ventures and business itself.
Now as it is, the US businessmen are criticising the Bush adminstration openly in financial magazines(like Forbes and The Economist)for shifting toward protectionism as they feel such action interferes with their business with China. They both have the right and freedom to criticise.
I don't see an iota of benefit Biopolis brings to common Singaporeans. The only thing it brings are high paying jobs for foreign scientists and profit opportunities for corporations.
What do average Singaporeans get? Maybe nice buildings to look at.
we're too jaded here to come up with anythign great. -
a singaporean can NEVER be a talent in singapore... they need to go overseas to become FOREIGN TALENT from singapore.
was not jesus chased out of NAZARETH? because he was raised there? what did jesus say?One of the greatest ironies about Nazareth is that, although it is now world-famous as the Savior's home town, the people of His time held Him with such low regard, to the point of contempt and even outright hate, that He didn't perform many miracles there. In fact, it eventually got so bad (He was at least twice run out of town, and once nearly thrown over the town's cliff by a mob) that He actually had to move away to Capernaum (on the north coast of the Sea Of Galilee) to keep His neighbors from killing him!
seriously... we are just throwing good money on those PHD students who would be relegated to nothing more then highly paid servants of "FOREIGN TELAN"
Fact Finder: What popular saying has its origin because of Nazareth?
(a) "The Lord helps those who help themselves."
(b) "Live and let live."
(c) "A prophet has no honor in his own home."
Matthew 13:57-58
to put it in another way....
WE ARE ALL TALENTED... but we CANNOT be LOCAL talent, there is no such thing!!!...
we must leave singapore behind if we want to be recognised as TALENT.
TALENT is a matter of perception, the foreign hotdog always tastes better then local... the moon is always brighter beyond our border.
even the malaysian ah beng is "smarter" then our local grads... -
I think the pressure on the scientists to discover megabucks drugs will be so great that they'll make harmful side-effects look small to get the drugs out to the market. Look at the Vioxx lawsuits on and payouts by Merck. You don't hear scientists jailed or struck off. They've probably made their buck and enjoying life in the Carribean while Merck struggles financially.
-
Good. Now where's the monies to fuel the exist?Originally posted by tripwire:a singaporean can NEVER be a talent in singapore... they need to go overseas to become FOREIGN TALENT from singapore.
was not jesus chased out of NAZARETH? because he was raised there? what did jesus say?
seriously... we are just throwing good money on those PHD students who would be relegated to nothing more then highly paid servants of "FOREIGN TELAN"
to put it in another way....
WE ARE ALL TALENTED... but we CANNOT be LOCAL talent, there is no such thing!!!...
we must leave singapore behind if we want to be recognised as TALENT.
TALENT is a matter of perception, the foreign hotdog always tastes better then local... the moon is always brighter beyond our border.
even the malaysian ah beng is "smarter" then our local grads... You can't just eat West-North winds out there before you find the opportunities.